I’m an atheist, and I hate when people say “I don’t believe in god I believe in science.” Science isn’t a thing you should simply believe in. That’s Scientism. Science is a process. It’s not a deity.

@speggeri90

2 жыл бұрын

"Science without philosophy, facts without perspective and valuation, cannot save us from havoc and despair. Science gives us knowledge, but only philosophy can give us wisdom."

@ponybottle

2 жыл бұрын

I totally agree; I make a point of never using the word 'Belief' when referring to science. "I understand science" is a more accurate expression. If I want to be really pernickitty I say something like "I try to keep my confidence in the scientific consensus proportionate to the data presented in support of it".

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@@speggeri90 science, also known as Natural philosophy, Is philosophy with a set of empirical methodologies. So you can't have the one without the other.

@speggeri90

2 жыл бұрын

@潘poon Knowledge perhaps to a certain extent, but wisdom and philosophy not, I agree. Philosophy is synthetic interpretation and wisdom is the outcome.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@潘poon You are confusing agency with instrumental value. Science is a process of combined methodologies and philosophical inquiry based on Logic. Its a systematic evaluation of facts. Its good because this process of evaluation never stops challenging our epistemology of the past and future.

"Our science is anti-intellectual by nature. All it does is measure things!" ~ Nietzsche (1882)

@howarddavies8937

8 ай бұрын

Nietzsche a typical Philosopher, and controversial with it. 😖

@howarddavies8937

8 ай бұрын

Science is a conceptual discipline. Many people resent that because they don't have the intelligence to understand the concepts.

@howarddavies8937

8 ай бұрын

And that by the look of it includes Nietzsche.

@dartskihutch4033

5 ай бұрын

​@@howarddavies8937you seem offended. Nietzsche is a renown philosopher, and there are many highly accredited scientists who have a similar notion as Rupert Sheldrake. Theyre not saying science is BS, they're saying it is vastly incomplete, and some use it to arrogantly profess their superiority in what is true rather than modestly stating there is so much we don't know. For example, a study was done where a subject was told to guess which of their three family members (also in the study) we're going to answer the phone. The study was intended to be 33% chance of course, but they were able to guess correct more often, and consistently beyond outliers. In other words, they managed to beat the odds with statistically significant odds although the mind should have no influence on the odds. Just some food for thought and to hopefully keep your mind open to the many possibilities.

@exprezza1648

4 ай бұрын

So@@howarddavies8937 having an emotional response to questions about the status quo immediately suggests a closed mind. Something a true scientist should never have.

I am reminded of the story of the 2 researchers who determined that stomach ulcers were caused by bacteria and could be cured with common antibiotics. The 2 doctors were attacked from all sides by doctors and scientists who demanded retraction because their egos couldn't accept that they may have overlooked a simple cure for their patients. Then of course the threat of malpractice suits was a factor as well. When ego and fear loom large in the picture many "scientists" will fall back on the security of dogma.

@dallasweaver4061

Жыл бұрын

That is an excellent example of why science works. The data showing cures eventually got through. Much of that slow response was caused by MD's that don't keep up with the science. Remember: Mechanics are to Engineers like MD's are to Science. MD's are not scientists (except the Ph.D, MD that are few in number).

@Dr.mandril

Жыл бұрын

More people need to hear about this video, spread the word. Share to your friend and on tik tok for younger audiences.

@phillipamunari6188

Жыл бұрын

Too bad the antibiotics you think are the cure are all too often very harmful. Damage good gut bacteria. If the cure is pharmaceutical it most likely isn't science but business.

@brianjacob8728

Жыл бұрын

well, the scientists shouldn't be accepting dogma in the first place. Scientific knowledge is meant to be constantly changing.

@AM-es4mp

10 ай бұрын

And now( previous to 2023 We now understand ulcers and many more Dis- eases are "manifesred" in the body, ( sometimes looong after)the Initial mental /emotional/ psycological stresses/ traumas occured , . Dependindenton one one percieves such . The

I have been originally trained as an Electrical Engineer and have spent, quite literally, the rest of my life casually looking at Chaos Theory (I am now 60 yrs old). Chaos theory is beginning to question many of these very issues that Mr. (Dr.). Sheldrake is referring to. I have even seen a number of PhD's in engineering and physics directly question the models that they are using and come up with alternative descriptions of reality. Dr. Tiller (from I think Cal Tech) comes immediately to mind. In fact, the CLOSED system thinking that modern physics uses may be causing a number of the inherent problems (and ultimately creating their own paradoxes, zero point energy = infinity, is an example) in the current description of reality. Open system thinking may be much better suited to the reality that we see - even if the ultimate universe is effectively closed. It is OPEN from "our perspective" due to its overwhelming magnitude. This also may require a reaction diffusion wave (like the one used to describe modern computer chips) as a basic underlying wave structure rather than the "mechanical wave" modern physics currently subscribes to. [Note: Mathematics tends to lead other fields of inquiry. Mathematics, is unlike any of the physics fields. It does not come about its thinking empirically as physics does, but rather through the deductions of logic. It is an "internal" rather than "external" form of thinking if you will, or as Plato would have said, from a three term proportion rather than a 4 term proportion. In most cases, Modern physics is from a 4 term proportional form of thought. Moreover, because of this internal deductive viewpoint, any two mathematicians will always come to the same conclusions when looking at the same information This is a result of the deductive form of thinking. In Mathematics, a proof is always a proof, just the realm of its application may be subsumed into larger and larger fields of understanding. In other words, even when Other forms of geometry came about, Euclidean geometry was still true, we have just found other forms of geometry that are also true, and we have to look at the specific situation to see which one to apply. Ie exactly what does the problem subscribe itself to] An example of the problem Mr.(Dr.) Sheldrake is referring to, in modern physics is the concept of life "popping" up only after we have reached a certain level of complexity. In other words, currently physics makes the decision that we are only conscious because of our complexity . Consciousness itself is just a matter of complexity. This assumption seems rather implausible, but it is the current (or at least was) assumption used by physicist. Perhaps a better description of reality may be life occurring depending on the internal processing the entity is actually using (ie open or closed system processing- open system processing (balance in motion ie. K.E.= min) is used by a living system and closed system processing (balance - ie. P.E. = min) by a dead one), and the level of intellect is just a matter of how much internal processing we are capable of. In fact, Benoit Mandelbrot created the fractal dimension which is measures complexity by looking at the "internal" twisting or convolution of a data set; and many data sets (and certainly almost all living systems) get more complicated the closer you look, not less. This type of internal thinking, typically, is why Mathematics tends to lead physics and other scientific forms of thinking. Perhaps we should look at our underlying scientific assumptions very closely, because we are most likely to be thinking FROM those assumptions rather than TO those assumptions. Modern Physics has about 22 paradoxes that they currently can't resolve, and perhaps the underlying (often hidden) assumptions are actually causing the problem. Perhaps a shift from a closed system paradigm to an open system paradigm may resolve many of these issues. It appears Mr. (Dr.) Sheldrake is, very likely, looking at the problem from an open systems paradigm. Of course, this holistic form of thinking may cause people to come to the ultimate conclusion that the holographic sum total of the universe is 1) more powerful than that linear combination of elements that make it up (ie. non linear) and 2) acts quite like a God of our universe (and perhaps the God that Kurt Gödel proved existed after Einstein died) if you will, where you are both responsible for your own actions and succeeded or failed as primarily a result of that form of action but also you must still must subscribe to the desires and actions of the whole. Perhaps the split is something like 90-10 in general and sometimes 10-90 in particular situations) In other words, you succeed primarily based on your own actions but also the combination of your actions coupled with the actions of the whole and how well these action fit together. Going in a particular direction if the whole is going in a different direction doesn't make much sense unless you know the whole is about to change direction. I don't know (I haven't spent any time trying to determine this) that this God matches the Christian thought of God (or any other for that matter), but I also don't think modern liberalism is ready to accept this form of thought either. It would simply mean too much self responsibility (90% in general). Mental Individualization is very difficult for many people to accept and is not of much use politically.

@diegocabralrincon9069

4 ай бұрын

Perhaps the works of the French Jean Pierre Garnier Malet could add Up to your knowledge.

@bigbutterbuns360

2 ай бұрын

Brilliantly said. I'm a game designer by trade and a devout Christian, and I just wanted to say I thoroughly enjoyed your comment and musings about the topic. The very tangible reality you pointed out at the end there, regarding self responsibility, I think is what marvelously aligns with the Christain understanding of ultimate reality, (which in essence is God and communion and connection with God directly as a person). The magnificent beauty of God's rational intentionality in all things, I think only begins to emerge more sharply the further and more intimately science advances in its real understandings of our universe. A quote I enjoy very much: For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries." Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers

Rupert Sheldrake, his intellectual honesty is almost materially tangible. There is none of the arrogance that you see in the depressing wing of science: material reductionism. Reductionism enhances mental illness. It's a phase for most intelligent people, a spiritual adolescence, the phase of unrest and rebellion, when the hormones kick in and start messing us up. I went through that throughout my late teenage years until the early twenties. It is sad that many adults never come out of it.

@kristenhansen1843

4 жыл бұрын

Rupert Sheldrake has no intellectual honesty. He is a parapsychologist and easily confused.

@AlexM-gv4pf

3 жыл бұрын

@@kristenhansen1843 or are you just easily indoctrinated?

@-Blue-_

2 жыл бұрын

@@kristenhansen1843 are you scientist???

@garyschraa7947

2 жыл бұрын

@@kristenhansen1843 Oh yeah for sure he's easily confused . It's by pure chance that he managed to put together a very clear and concise lecture . And it's by pure chance that he managed to give this 46 minute lecture to a full audience _____keeping them utterly silent and captivated . But then again you knew this as your comment is that of a shill . Good day m'dam

@peterturner6497

2 жыл бұрын

Actually old Rap is just a total moron. Absolute idiot of the highest order.

Whoever says that science has the answer to everything is ignorant of science.

@tomellis4750

2 жыл бұрын

Love it when people say, "Scientists don't everything." My reply is, "Yes they do, they say they don't to not lose their pensions."

@flemingcourt

2 жыл бұрын

@@tomellis4750 ?

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

That is an strawman argument. What people say is irrelevant. Trying to create gaps in our epistemology in an effort to introduce pseudo science in to the picture that is a god of the gaps type of fallacy. We don't need to claim that science can answer everything to see that this charlatan claims are unscientific and irrational.

@beesplaining1882

2 жыл бұрын

But whoever says science is the best method mankind has to understand and solve problems about the world has got it right.

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

Or worse yet, that science even claims that…

I'm just a boiler maker welder and this man managed to educate me. Thank you, plenty to think about now .

@smjarvis1234

2 жыл бұрын

Don’t say ‘just’ a boiler maker. You might have a much better brain than you give yourself credit for. God knows there are a lot of educated people out there with very limited ability to actually think. Keep on searching for knowledge… it’s good for the soul. And btw, if listening to this guy resonated with you, I’d say you’re on the right track. He’s a genius in the true sense of the word.

@mtlicq

2 жыл бұрын

Boiler maker welder? You can afford to get a car like Hooman, and do some social experiments like Hooman.

When someone says that they believe in science, what they're really saying is that they believe in today's mechanistic materialism.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

You are confused. Science rejects all metaphysical worldviews, materialism included. Science is based on Methodological Naturalism, meaning that it acknowledges our methodological limitations within the physical world and any claim beyond it needs to be supported by objective evidence. Any claim that can't be objectively verified is rejected. Quantum Mechanics, Chaos theory, Emergence and Complexity science do not subscribe to a mechanistic picture of nature....so you need to update your "strawman accusations" about science.

@uruichii2968

2 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 good point . I think Rupert is trying to draw attention to the way science is handled , not trying to invalidate the efficacy of the methodology as a whole. it’s good to draw attention to facets of science we’ve grown too familiar and comfortable with , allows us to employ skepticism and maybe find things in places we’d other wise neglect to look…

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@@uruichii2968 -"I think Rupert is trying to draw attention to the way science is handled , not trying to invalidate the efficacy of the methodology as a whole" -I am not sure about that. Science has a self correcting mechanism. Science can not be mishandled at an epistemic level. Sooner or later Objective falsification will remove any attempt to pollute our epistemology. In a Technical aspect (commercial applications) we can agree that economics can manipulate science...but that is irrelevant to Rupert's points. His goal is really clear. He rejects the Main Principles of Science.(Methodological Naturalism). He demands science to lower the standards and replace the principle of an Epistemic Acknowledgment with a non naturalistic non methodological Philosophical worldview. He wants to take science back to the Dark age.

I love these kind of people, so humble but so knowledgeable but most importantly, so sincere.

@mijubo

5 жыл бұрын

and so stupid

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

Snake oil peddlers are sincere too. Sincerely misleading and humbly humbuggering..wake up!

@RedziRekuEdze

5 жыл бұрын

@@dankahraman354 you couldn't handl my wakefulness. You would go schizophrenic instantly.

@IsaacNussbaum

5 жыл бұрын

@@mijubo Dr. Sheldrake might be in error, I am not qualified to say. But I do know this, he is not stupid.

@mijubo

5 жыл бұрын

@@IsaacNussbaum just some linguistic apologetics. I can just make assumptions on what Sheldrake is. But from his books I can just assume he is stupid and ignorant or not stupid and horribly mislead or intelligent and misleading. Choose what you want. In the end it just matters that he is wrong.

Quote of the week: “ Somewhere inside your head there’s a little Rupert…”

Mr. Sheldrake, one of the top 5 least known and appreciated thinkers/scientists of our era. Love this guy!

@darvidtorres

3 жыл бұрын

Who are the other "top 5" on that list?

@unseenstalkr

3 жыл бұрын

@@darvidtorres I would put someone like randall carlson on the list along with graham hancock. i would have to think about who else to round out that specific top 5 cuz there are so many other independent thinkers out there who have fantastic perspectives.

@demonmonsterdave

3 жыл бұрын

@@unseenstalkr Nassim Haramein, Pierre Robitaille, Ben Davidson, Marko Rodin, Scott Mandelker

@emilarpi345

3 жыл бұрын

@@darvidtorres That's making 6 of them.

@randalthor6872

2 жыл бұрын

@@demonmonsterdave Terrance Mckenna, a friend of Sheldrake's, should be on that list!

Tesla said the moment we begin to study beyond the physical nature we will progress leaps and bounds.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

Two requests: 1) Find out where Tesla said this 2) the second part is extremely vague and imprecise. Sounds good but upon analysis is more meaningless prattle.

@damonhunter5143

5 жыл бұрын

Hello Steven Fernandez: my understanding is Tesla quoted "The day the Scientifc Communuty begin to study the supernatural, they will learn more in 10yrs than in ALL the previous years spent on scientific research"..............that said, I believe Sheldrake is onto something very important re 'revealing significant research' but then I'm no scientist, just a hunch, and I've long since learned to trust my intuition/God given senses.............In Almighty God We Trust.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

@@damonhunter5143 The world runs on evidence: Legal, medical, criminal and scientific. Would you trust a doctor if he said that he would carry out a medical operation based on his "God given intuition"?

@kristenhansen1843

4 жыл бұрын

@@damonhunter5143 Tesla was what is called an 'intuitive physicist', that is, a person who has a feeling things work a certain way, and without a lot of formulaic rig-a-marole figures out how something works. We owe him thanks for AC electricity and the AC-motor plus a lot of other things. However I think his 'Venusian communication device' tops all the rest.

@jasonozolins8781

4 жыл бұрын

@@dankahraman354 I do not believe in god, but I do believe that intuition is areal and valuable thing. In animals we call it instinct, and believe it is how they survive. Our brains process things even when we are not aware of this consciously (we don't need to think to breathe, our body becomes aware of, and reacts to threats before we are able to make a logical assessment. So it is very possible that based on information and pattern recognition, people can intuit, or have some level of knowledge about something, even if they lack a formal education. A practical example in regards to medicine: about 9 years ago I started getting very sick. Losing weight, having severe migraines, bouts of vomiting and diarrhea that put me in the ER for dehydration on several occasions. The doctors tested me for all the usual things. The weight loss and general illness made them think AIDS or Hepatitis, both tested negative again and again. More tests showed several severe nutritional deficiencies. The doctors still had no diagnosis. However, when I became aware of the nutritional deficiencies, I thought about the fact that these symptoms happened in episodes, and my first thought was some sort of autoimmune illness, probably dealing with the stomach. So I did research, turns out celiac disease presents with all teh symptoms I had. I suggested this to my doctor, who ordered the tests. The tests confirmed celiac. I began treatment (which is eating a gluten free diet) and my symptoms went away. They stay gone as long as I don't eat gluten. I didn't have medical training, but I recognized patterns, and followed a hunch, and essentially diagnosed an illness doctors couldn't figure out for several years. So if a doctor told me he had a hunch, or it was his "god given intuition" and what he or she said made sense to me, I would allow them to carry out a medical procedure based on that.

I love listening to Sheldrake. Very rare mind!

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

a meshed up mind...

@Dr.mandril

Жыл бұрын

More people need to hear about this, spread the word. Share to your friend and on tik tok for younger audiences.

Since 1985, the Amsterdam Science Museum has allowed visitors to participate in the am-I-being-stared-at experiment, based on Sheldrake’s work, with one subject and one starer doing 30 trials before vacating their seats for the next couple. By 2002, more than 18,700 couples had taken part and the results were a staggering 10 to the power of 376 against them being produced by chance. It’s an on-going experiment and the number of subjects who have participated is now over 20,000, making this the largest and longest-running paranormal research project ever conducted.

@andytaylor3029

3 жыл бұрын

Source??? Official source? I claim this is BULLSHIT. I ve been to the NEMO many times, never seen that “experiment”. I researched this online, this paragraph you pasted above appears only in a couple of sites that support .... drumroll... Rupert sheldrake !!! Don’t believe this crap

@tanko.reactions176

2 жыл бұрын

@@andytaylor3029 i do have personal "psychic" experience, so i do rather believe it. seems like you are still fettered to the chains of "science", poor fella

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

2 жыл бұрын

@@andytaylor3029 It seems to me a lot of people making comments in support of ludicrous nonsense have insufficient appreciation for the power of their own imaginations.

@richardgomes5420

2 жыл бұрын

I've participated on that trial. I was sitting right in front of another guy. Then I've answered a questionnaire where I've declared that I was being stared. Isn't that amazing? 🤣

@LLlap

2 жыл бұрын

@@tanko.reactions176 I had a burger once. That proves that there is a McDonalds on the Moon.

When I was in my senior year of my college physics program & about to go off to a doctoral program, a psychic told me that I would end up working in the lower atmosphere. 15 years later, i was working air traffic control at an airport when I remembered that prediction. to say that my path to air traffic was incredibly convoluted, involving things like needing to get a job in the NY metro area because my wife (met 1 year after getting my BS & 6 mos after dropping out of grad school) wanted to move back to be near her mother.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

dude we all work in the lower atmosphere....lol

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

2 жыл бұрын

Seems to me, except for cosmonauts and astronauts, we are all working in the lower atmosphere so... Seems to me, 'psychic abilities' were invented as a means to fleece the gullible among us.

@dlsamson

2 жыл бұрын

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL Seriously, my job as an air traffic controller involves the lower atmosphere in ways that few other jobs qualify. Yes, we all live & work in the lower atmosphere (even astronauts who do have to come down on occasion) but my job as an air traffic controller involves dealing with the lower atmosphere in ways that few other jobs entail. There are only 4 professions that I can think of that actually involve dealing with the lower atmosphere: pilot (I never had the vision), flight attendant (not likely in the early 1980s given that I am male), air traffic controller or weather observer/reporter. The last two professions do not account for many employment opportunities).

@dlsamson

2 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 we all work in the lower atmosphere but few professions work with the lower atmosphere in the same way as air traffic control.

@REDPUMPERNICKEL

2 жыл бұрын

@@dlsamson The 'psychics' prediction is not impressive as, no matter what job you found, you would be working in the lower atmosphere. If you had become a miner miles underground you might argue even more strongly for her psychic power. I mean, no one gets lower in the atmosphere than miners eh.

Can listen to him all day. Science needs to lose its love affair with materialism.

@JerseyLynne

5 жыл бұрын

He has a beautiful, beautiful mind.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

Science is science who said science is materialistic or is in "love" with materialism?

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

yup let's embrace faith healing, shut down our hospitals and do away with vaccines!

@glutinousmaximus

5 жыл бұрын

@@dankahraman354 :0)

@carolberry2239

5 жыл бұрын

@@dankahraman354 science IS material..thats the birth of science in the 1600's thats why you need "evidence" that must be tangible. Cant get more material than that.

The parrot my grand parents had used to call my name for about an hour before we arrived. This reality is also very common between children and their mothers, sometimes fathers, but I believe seeing you were once literally connected to your mother a stronger connection remains. I know it is not like that for everybody but that its a reality for many cannot be denied, even if it counters modern science.

@kristenhansen1843

4 жыл бұрын

did you arrive at your grand parents approximately the same time every day. Dogs do that too when they expect their owners to return from work. So do children expecting to see their parents pick them up from day care. Are parrots, dogs and children therefore psychic? Let's not jump to confusions. There's a much simpler explanation. You should be able to figure this out.

@penyarol83

2 жыл бұрын

@Kristen Hansen you don't know much about psychic phenomena, do you?

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

​@@penyarol83 No one does...everyone has his personal subjective interpretations of an experience he had...influenced by previous popular interpretations. People just love to pretend to know things that they don't or don't understand.

@penyarol83

2 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 hope you’re looking into a mirror when you say that last line

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@@penyarol83 I am not the one who pretends to know things that I don't and can't prove mate......

I strive to find what I call “elegant solutions” to problems. I was fascinated as a child with spinning a ball overhead on a string because it seemed to defy gravity. When contemplating spinning galaxies later in junior high I asked the science teacher why the stars don’t just go flying off into space, or when is the universe going to start collapsing vs expanding? I always felt I was less intelligent because I couldn’t understand answers like dark matter or dark energy. And I’m still angry to this day over over having a test question on the nature of centrifugal vs centripetal force marked wrong. I watched this entire presentation based on this guys explanation of dark matter / dark energy. Again, I’ve always felt less intelligent than those who claim science has the answer to everything, not anymore!

@richardgomes5420

2 жыл бұрын

Science may not have an answer for everything. However, it has dozens of questions for literally everything. This is why Science works: because Science is auto-correcting, increasingly converging to more and more precise understanding of everything. I particularly don't like what Mr Rupert is doing. He is basically employing maximum skepticism in order to criticize and debunking Science. However, his skepticism disappears completely when he mentions religious dogma and superstitions.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@@richardgomes5420 he tries to poke holes in science's high standards of evidence in his attempt to sneak in his pseudo philosophy. He strawmans science's auxiliary principles by introducing a philosophical worldview (materialism). Science's priciples are those of Methodological Naturalism . MN is not a philosophical worldview but an epistemic acknowledgment of our limitations as an empirical creature.

@blauwzakjecrack

2 жыл бұрын

Bikes are balanced when having speed,even whilst standing still using a treadmill for example, the reason of this effect is unknown. It is not caused by centrifugal forces,since this effect is also present using skates on ice for example. The orbital mechanism as we know them do not allow planets to stay in their orbits, this system would collapse very quickly. Airplane wings create lift. They also create lift when upside down when you`d expect the opposite to happen the workings on the lift effect is also unknown. Taught you might like this information. Anyways

@richardgomes5420

2 жыл бұрын

@@blauwzakjecrack : Bikes can roll for hundreds of meters without anyone riding them due to the geometry of the front wheel. This is a well known fact by designers of bikes and they build bikes this way in order to achieve augment stability and even safety. You not only got bikes wrong but also planet orbits wrong and also aerodynamics wrong.

@silajeep1

2 жыл бұрын

Richard Gomes science is auto correcting ? This talk is aiimed at people just like you. The very point he is making is what you seemed to have missed....the dogmas he mentions restrict or limit scientific progress when it could progress faster without those limitations. For example, for decades biologists thought that the appendix was a vestigial organ that was functionally redundant through evolutionary progress so paid no attention to it. However, others ignored this worldview and studied it further to discover it had a important function during the developing baby stages in that it was the baby's sole immune system organ until the rest of the immune system slowly developed ad took over at some point after which the appendix stopped functioning. No auto correction happening here. Yet a faulty worldview prevented scientific progress in fully understanding our immune system for decades and is not an isolated case either.

"I don't know what the truth is, I'm just a scientist." - Donald Hoffman ✊❤️🤜🤛🔥✌️👌🤯😁 If only more scientists felt this way and didn't push ideas so easily off into pseudoscience and material based atheism.

@spider161

2 жыл бұрын

Issue is the same that happened with religion as well, power and money started to get involved. Don't talk about X only Y. Instead of just letting them go fucking wild in every direction.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

lol......you are ignorant and confused Seth. Hoffman is a charlatan...he makes claims about a "mathematical model" when there aren't any variables for our mental properties.

@InfoArtistJKatTheGoodInfoCafe

2 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 😂. Your ignorance is showing. Seth is on point.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@@InfoArtistJKatTheGoodInfoCafe You just stated what you wish to be true....not what is really true. You need to provide objective evidence for your beliefs or else you are just an irrational individual for accepting claims without good reasons.

@leebennett1821

2 жыл бұрын

Atheism has nothing to Do with Materialism do you realize than some Religions are Atheist!!!! And Besides it's the Great JuJu under the Sea that is the Progenitor of the Human Race he shit them out after Wugger-Wugger the Whale God Buggered him after an all night Bender in the sunken city of Atlantis I know the truth and anyone who Doesn't Believe me is a silly poopy head

One of the seeds of love , Thanks

I come from a science background myself and though I do see the advantages of a scientific method I also see some of the traps of it as well. This deterministic/materialistic framework doesn't seem to account for it all. In the last few years I have had experiences that are outside of what I can understand by science alone. There is clearly more work to understand about our minds and consciousness and how that needs to be brought into the equation. I do not know of anyone that understands this at all. We are like children at the beach and perhaps one of the best things we can do is enjoy the experience of sand and water -- to live with a sense of wonder and awe at the amazing universe of which we are apart.

@GHCODPvZ

3 жыл бұрын

Greatly put into words, I completely agree! I believe consciousness will never be able to be fully explained by the deterministic framework science is currently using.

@silentgrove7670

3 жыл бұрын

@@GHCODPvZ Thanks. One of the thoughts I have had is that people only look at information through their own perspective and bias. There are some scientists looking at these areas though their work isn't well supported. Rupert Sheldrake has some interesting observations.

@miklosdavid7627

3 жыл бұрын

Human consciousness is overvalued because it regards us humans. All living organisms have consciousness which must mean that Consciousness is an essential part or principal law of the Universe, at least to my understanding. "To live with a sense of wonder and awe" is very well put. And when science or certain scientists simply can't deal with the phenomenon of consciousness it just shows the beauty and mysteriousness of life.

@farsamsyed8617

3 жыл бұрын

@@miklosdavid7627 I don’t think human consciousness is overvalued due to hubristic nature. Animals do have consciousness but it’s precisely self consciousness that is extremely deceptive. 95% of animals do not have any form of self awareness (they don’t know they are) they are the closest things to naturally and biologically programmed robots. The reason for mystique regarding human consciousness is because it is THE thing itself that is responsible for all observations made to begin with. It’s like only having a single measuring tool in terms of investigating the phenomena of existence itself, this is the only one we know of, all we know of is derived from here, we are the source for our own knowledge. So how exactly objective are the plethora of facts we have gathered over time. Modern science especially a materialistic world view is only working out the ‘how’ question but not the Why at all question which some might say is meaningless even tho we exactly know what is being referred to and the question is being avoided due to lack of answering faculties. We ultimately want to restrict everything that there is to existence itself down to the “universe” to shorten our field of inquiry so we can finally have a unified theory for “everything”.

@KennedyApproach

3 жыл бұрын

So what exactly did you experience that you cannot understand using science?

Dr Sheldrake is truly a maverick genius and a national treasure! He is a very brave man that has earned and deserves tremendous respect regardless of what we may think of his ideas or if they are true or not. It is men like him that have changed the world over the years.

@simstar6557

2 жыл бұрын

He just sells pseudoscience books 😄.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@@simstar6557 he preys on the gullible and ignorant of this world.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@buzz magister Well politicians and charlatans try to sell pseudo philosophical ideologies...

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

Name one brave thing he does. Selling books to believers?

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@@ihatespam2 lol

To hear Dr Sheldrake put it that way... it sounds as if dark matter is species akin to 21st century epicycles to explain away retro motion behavior, a form of techno-hukom.

Yes. However, I suggest that machines are made in our image. All machines depend on movement if only that of electrons. Biological life or mechanical action all depend on magnetics, and all depend upon time or all motion would cease.

Im obsessed with these talks, and his wife and children are just as brilliant ❤

Best Quintessential ever - TED - masterpiece ! Shame on ted rejecting this outstanding presentation!

@granthurlburt4062

4 ай бұрын

They reject him because his ideas are nonsense but impressive to the ignoranti.

@anonymoushuman8344

4 ай бұрын

It would have been harder for TED Talks to yield to the pressure to drop his presentation if he'd started by listing his scientific credentials (PhD, Harvard, Cambridge, publications, etc.) and then said, "I'm now going to commit an act of scientific heresy." It would also have helped if he'd called it 'The Scientism Delusion' instead.

@CGMaat

4 ай бұрын

@@anonymoushuman8344 this is exactly why we have not evolved over the narrow JUST physical explain- destroying ourselves!

@m.k.3197

4 ай бұрын

@@granthurlburt4062 You'll need to back that up with some facts,especially since your statement implies that you believe you are enlightened

Science: "Give me one free miracle and I'll explain everything to you."

I would love to ask Rupert Sheldrake why i have experienced numerous times the sudden fearful urge to look at the bottom of my bedroom door, within 3 seconds a spider will come under the door frame and into my room. (We get house spiders, a fair amount.) But how do i "know" when its going to happen??!This has happened to me at least 5 times where i sort of telepathically "predict" it. Ive even sat up out of bed, in the dark, had the urge to shine my phone torch at the door frame, lo and behold, a spider walks in. I dont have any other psychic abilities that may be useful, or profitable!!! Just this stupid spider prediction!!

Recent events have unveiled the subjective application and focus of science!

@ThePallidor

2 жыл бұрын

Understatement of the century

This man's comments RE the "placebo effect" are simply brilliant! The kind of realization you can't believe didn't occur to you...but it didn't.

Well explained 🌹

Wonderful! Thank you!

WOW! What a brilliant talk.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

only if one is gullible , ignorant with a huge existential anxiety.

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

Really though? Please note his claims of what science claims are nearly all wrong..

Great to see Rupert being respected, the TED people were not so polite and banned this talk, because they cannot bear anyone to question the dogmas of 'Science'. The original foundation of science was based on questioning, and testing ideas, something they seem to have forgotten today.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

Rupert has to back the science behind his speculations..is what he says repeatable? What are the conditions for testing his hypotheses?

@damonhunter5143

5 жыл бұрын

Michael Gorman: well said and very, very true.............................God Bless.

@Deliquescentinsight

5 жыл бұрын

@@damonhunter5143 Thank you Damon, all the best to you.

@glutinousmaximus

5 жыл бұрын

It depends very much on what is understood by the term 'Science'. The scientific method is tried and tested _ad nauseum_ but relying on some "consciousness Woo" which cannot be adequately pinned down, is why TED give it the thumbs down. I guess time will tell.

@dankahraman354

4 жыл бұрын

sorry but the ones who are deluded here are those defending Sheldrake.

Actually the "principle of conservation of mass" is only approximate. In most of the effects we experience in daily life its an extraordinarily GOOD approximation, but it's approximate nonetheless. In nuclear processes and particle physics processes it's not even approximate - it's just completely wrong, and scientists in those fields don't assume it. But even in chemistry, mechanical processes, and so on, mass varies a tiny tiny amount as energy moves into and out of systems. When you wind your wristwatch the mass of the spring increases a tiny amount, because you put in energy (E=mc^2, remember?) Energy is actually conserved, except for one single effect. The expansion of the universe causes photons in flight to red shift, and that decreases their energy. You might say it "goes into the expansion." Of course, if the universe contracted again it would come back, but our normal expressions for writing down "total energy" don't include that "expansion" term, so in those calculations it's just gone. We could fix that if we wanted to - we'd just stick in a term for "expansion energy," and then the conservation would be perfect. It's just such a tiny proportion of energy we don't bother.

This man is a genius, we need more people like him.

@jmc8076

9 ай бұрын

He’s human as all of us. What’s diff is he’s been more curious and open minded with healthy skepticism. Be the change you want to see.

@joelschama1735

7 ай бұрын

Genius? He doesn't even know what atheism is nor understands maths and its predictive power. Atheism is the rejection of the proposition that a god or gods exist based on the lack of evidence to the contrary. It's not a belief nor a worldview. Science is all about NOT UNDERSTANDING OR KNOWING. If we know everything there would be no need for science. Moreover, Cartesian Duality is debunked by all philosophy and science. The man is a moron.

@joelschama1735

7 ай бұрын

​@@jmc8076He's so open minded his brain fell out.

@LoveAIChatGPTMoneyMaking23

4 ай бұрын

@@joelschama1735 unoriginal

@joelschama1735

4 ай бұрын

@@LoveAIChatGPTMoneyMaking23 it's from Richard Dawkins. I thought everyone knew that. 🙄

If there is one understanding I've experienced it is of focused awareness.. of the desired knowledge.. a question asked.. the mind reaching out to give the answer.. one example out of many is bumping into the person you need to see.. in a strange place... knowledge of others being willing to wait for no reason at a place. And to have say 5 mins later a person walk in that needed to talk to you .. or visa verser .. we can and do focus. And project.. our wishes.. to others . If they are receptive.. it's oftentimes the case you will hear or meet them.. there are so many examples..

Of course there’s matter, but there’s energy. Science knows about probability, and it’s own limitations about truly knowing everything. No such things as eternal laws of nature, things change. Our understanding changes.

@spyfawkes

2 жыл бұрын

“Science” doesn’t know anything. It’s a method, a process. Understanding the limits of science occurs when the philosophy of science is known and applied by the humans practicing the scientific method.

One thing science has been consistent at is proving itself wrong

Back in the 80's, long before caller ID, I would answer the phone 'Hello (person's name). I was right so often my friends all wondered how I did it.

I like his very sly nod to the Electric Universe there at 15:13 ish... :P

@blauwzakjecrack

4 жыл бұрын

Immanuel Velikovsky- Immanuel Velikovsky - Immanuel Velikovsky !!fak!!! Man!!!! . It makes so much more sense,but yeah, you don't want to kick of Newton of his throne now do ya, not to mention the domino effect that will follow.

@Casiusss3

3 жыл бұрын

Check channel suspicious observers for more 😀

“Give is one free miracle, and we will explain the rest” -Terrence M. What realization, formed provocation.

@seppyteppy

4 жыл бұрын

@Prowler Cam thats a circular argument tho

@markward3981

2 жыл бұрын

No free miracles without belief

Such clarity

1 thing the speaker here has incorrect is thinking that nature, like probabilistic quantum theory, considers possibilities. Nature does not consider possibilities. Probabilistic quantum theory does. Writing and solving a probabilistic quantum theory equation can determine probabilities of possibilities of an object because probabilistic quantum theory intentionally determines only general unspecified solutions to problems, and these general unspecified solutions turn out to be probabilities of possibilities. If probabilistic quantum theorists determine any general unspecified solution of an object, and then they specify the object's unspecified quantities, such as, in example, specifying the object’s exact initial position vector in nature and its exact initial speed vector in nature, then their general unspecified probabilities of possibilities solution becomes 1 exact specified solution, the 1 observable in nature, with all the probabilities of possibilities, which never existed in nature, eliminated.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

He confuses the territory with the map.

Science is rigor, and the body of knowledge thereby attained. It does not create metaphysical implications within it's own discipline.

@paulaoh5306

2 жыл бұрын

And therefore has limitations in terms of what it can tell us about the nature of reality, particularly if its practitioners are unwilling to examine the discipline's foundational assumptions.

@havenbastion

2 жыл бұрын

@James Strawn A rigorous one. The bottom line is, if you start with that single idea, "science is rigor", you could recreate everything else we currently call science from it.

@havenbastion

2 жыл бұрын

@@paulaoh5306 Right. Metaphysics is a framework for understanding everything in relation to everything else. As soon as you can study something rigorously, that's a scientific study for all intents and purposes. Whether or not it's done well it's a separate question. But there's more! Logic is when we find rigorous relationships that always apply. Math is rigorous relationships of quantity.

An eye opener! Another eye opener well worth reading is the book " Pasteur vs Beauchamp"

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

or ...another pet in the back....

@Dr.mandril

Жыл бұрын

More people need to hear about this video, spread the word. Share to your friend and on tik tok for younger audiences.

@drdolittle1085

9 ай бұрын

Do you mean the one written by Ethel Hume?

I have been banned from TED. Badge of honour? I tried to get into the auditorium wearing latex suspenders and a gimp mask. Apparently I should "never return"

I love science because it doesn't have answer of everything.

My ah-ha moment is how potential is not measurable but events are but then they are in the past. So our past does not determine our future. Cannot recommend the book Power vs Force by Dr David R Hawkins fits very well and overlaps with this material.

@demonmonsterdave

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you.

Thankful for this man 🙏🙌🕯

@Dr.mandril

Жыл бұрын

More people need to hear about this, spread the word. Share to your friend and on tik tok for younger audiences.

Thank you for leaving this public on KZread.

Brilliant elaboration

Wonderfully clear and brilliant. We must be, in fact, projecting and receiving devices. A renaissance is happening with this new awareness, and our Creator is right around the corner, ready to welcome us if we press on.

@mindsigh4

2 жыл бұрын

yes, years ago i had a few dreams that were VERY memorable, & now im seeing things in society that are mirroring certain Key points in the dreams. have u ever listened/watched Eckhart Tolle videos on youtube? in one of my dreams (from 35 yrs ago)it played out a scenario in the future (now) & it was demonstrated to me the activation of something in humans that caused immediate reactions & that most people were unaware of this activation while it was happening to them. when i read power of now in 2002 & he outlined the "pain-body" & i had a name for this thing that gets activated.& like Tolle says, it goes dormant, but sleeping with one eye open, waiting for an opportunity, like a vampire, to feed on us & stir up the pain-body of others, or to fire upthe collective pain body of groups &/or nation states as a whole.

@riverwildcat1

2 жыл бұрын

@@mindsigh4 Your dreams were prophetic, and maybe still are. I've been guided by such dreams myself, and it's a good sign that you're marked for knowledge. But do not be distracted away from the Judeo-Christian God who created us. He alone has power and authority: thesecondtempleofsolomon.com

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

If there were demonstrative evidence you could claim clarity, but there is not, It is all postulations. How did you establish that we send and receive things outside of the natural order? And what's this deal about a creator? Got a definition or evidence?

@brianmi40

2 жыл бұрын

or, not. And we just need to SERIOUSLY raise our educational standards.

@riverwildcat1

2 жыл бұрын

@@ihatespam2 Evidence abounds in every age of history; white light after-death and coming back from impossible wounds; telepathy, both human and animal; miraculous, continuous and dramatic healings... the list is extraordinarily long. But always masses of people say, "That's not evidence."

Science is about great scientists standing on the shoulders of preceding great scientists.

@brianjacob8728

Жыл бұрын

That's the theory; unfortunately, the reality is far uglier. There is a lot of "bad" science that is currently the favored paradigm at the moment. Sheldrake illustrates just one example.

This video should be called The Science Illusion. The illusion is that it's about science.

I just did the experiment of staring at my cat and focusing intently on his head. After 30 seconds the experiment ended. He never turned round to look at me, or gave any sign that he knew I was looking at him. Theory is busted. Animals cannot tell they are being watched.

Love this guy.. I think he is brilliant... I don’t know why but I have thought along these lines many times. Here is just a simple thought... Think about it long enough and you begin to understand a lot about life. I was over at a friends house one day and we both were talking about a friend who had just past away. I was thinking, and said, when I die I wonder who or what I will become after my death ? Will there be hate, will there be war and bigotry, will there be sorrow, sickness, pain, hunger and sadness, and in between, will there be love, happiness, respect, and fulfillment ? Will I meet my friend again ? My friend looked at me and said, Tom, once you are dead you stay dead and you never come back. I looked back at my friend with a smile and said, the same can be said before I was born, but, here I am.

@kristenhansen1843

4 жыл бұрын

Tom Picketts' Astrophotography - Certainly, here you are. But like your friend said, once you are dead you stay dead and you never come back. Let's face it, the "afterlife" is just a wishy-washy way of saying "death". Sounds a lot nicer but it's still "death". There will be no more sorrow, sickness, pain, hunger and sadness from the moment you drop dead until the end of time! It's over. No free lunch!

@tatie7604

2 жыл бұрын

@@kristenhansen1843 No joy, happiness, bliss. You don't know what happens.

Interesting. I think he really points out well some of the dogma modern science has fallen into. That doesn't mean science is bad... certainly not, however if it breaks free of current dogma it is open to explore more and grow.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

No he doesn't. He just labels dogma Science's high standards of evidence and evaluation and strawmans its principles He has one job to do and he fails miserably. Science demands from him to provide Objective and independently verifiable evidence for his claims. HE can't so he decides to whine about it. Its similar to a ball-buster kid who no one wants to play with him and somehow he believes its their fault.

@rovidius2006

2 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 Scientists pile up praises upon each other like there is no tomorrow , but don't know how to build the simplest known life form , that tells volumes of how little they know and how much they hyperventilate . Turning science institutions into social sexual dogmatic platforms brings a new twist to its course . Verifiable because its agreed on or else expelled he will be is the way forced indoctrination works ,it can only be this way because there is no other way they ramble . He has remarkable insights ,respectful demeanor and a free mind .

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@@rovidius2006 -"Scientists pile up praises upon each other like there is no tomorrow" -You are confused...you are confusing Scientists with science. A scientist's word in weak and unimportant , what is important is that his science is able to meet the high standards of the process. -" but don't know how to build the simplest known life form" -lol They don't????? we should fire them all. You are a troll right? -"that tells volumes of how little they know and how much they hyperventilate " -No it doesn't , if they couldn't build a simple life form that would mean that biology is a complex field of study. You are able to post your ignorant claims because science understands many things on how reality works. Your device and internet connection are the result of our scientific knowledge. Dude...are you a kid or something? what's wrong with you. What shitty arguments are those. Have you ever being at a library, ever opened a text book in your life.....Sure there are many things we can not do or know yet...but wake up and study, there are many things that we do know. Grow up -"Turning science institutions into social sexual dogmatic platforms brings a new twist to its course . " -ok you are way too stupid to talk to.....lol

@rovidius2006

2 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660No , It means that they have no idea of what life is and try to steal the show, liars and projectionists .

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

@@rovidius2006 lol....biology is not your strong point right?

"Science" only connects the dots. Each time that happens there are two more questions that further detail where reality is. It is very powerful more in eliminating the thousands of possibilities that the actual dot proved to not exist than the single dot that it did. For seeking out such facts it is the best we have, and creating an "alternative" set of "facts" only enhances ignorance. There is however an entire area of thought that science does not touch even in aspiration, and that is the proper role of religion. If you have a goal science can demonstrate how the goal may be accomplished, but what it cannot do is have any input as to why that should be the goal. The majority of oppositional athiests (there are many religions where an all powerful god does not exist, and the ones with many gods do not see them that way) never see that problem as an issue and much damage has been done trying to apply some sort of scientific justification to what they wanted. Unfortunately, 90% of what religions preach seeks to disprove what anyone using scientific principles can see for themselves. Beyond commentary about arrogance there is nothing about other galaxies that are relevant to religion. It is not about origins, alternative "metaphysics" universes etc. It is very much a discussion of how a person should act in the world, and the differences of good and "evil" motivations in deciding a goal, and a whole lot more in that direction. Metaphors are a powerful tool in understanding nuances that can be hard to grasp but they they do not need to be physically the case to explain the mataphor. If the conflict in the decisions you make are described as two wolves fighting and the one that wins is the one you feed then the story can be true even without any actual wolves in this universe or any parallel universe. To even seek actual wolves to prove the story true is missing the point entirely. Any religion that is authoritarian or claims itself the only truth, are just ego manifestations of a "leader" that cannot abide what he says to be questioned, and uses "God" as a tool to get his way. Still after the nonsence claims, and authoritarian demands, there are usually some valid reasoning worthy of discussion, but the defience that reality is other than your eyes can see,is a disservice to evryone.

Test the staring from behind thing by seeing if it also occurs when an electromagnetic source emits signals that emulate those from a human

The ability of one's mind to interpret reality = the level of one's intelligence.

@mindsigh4

2 жыл бұрын

how about this quote from Arthur Shopenhaur; " man can do what he wills, but he cannot will what he wills'', im not a reader of A.S., but like this quote...

@djayjp

2 жыл бұрын

Or the extent to which correct predictions can be made.

@djayjp

2 жыл бұрын

@@mindsigh4 I don't get it.

@alocinotasor

2 жыл бұрын

@@djayjp ...and stay out of danger. True "survival of the fittest".

@alocinotasor

2 жыл бұрын

@@mindsigh4 agreed .. Noone knows how the brain determine how it wills what we will... But my guess is that it's a continuum of stimulus-response guided by self-interest. And those with wisdom do best.

Just gonna leave this name here: Immanuel Velikovsky / electronic universe. Would advise to research in an open space, cause your mind will be blown.

@demonmonsterdave

3 жыл бұрын

He often talks at EU conferences.

@blauwzakjecrack

2 жыл бұрын

@@demonmonsterdave well, yes but n since he is dead. But his idea`s are represented with the eu vison of the universe. I do also advocate the eu over the other theories.

I really do find the... "parallel" between quantum superpositions and actual realized actions, vs. our own human plans and eventual decisions, pretty striking. I don't think we should make too much of it, but it is "thought provoking."

@steviechampagne

5 сағат бұрын

you are made up of quantum particles, why wouldn’t quantum mechanics extend to you?

I once got busted in my neighbour's yard with just a towel, checking up on her dog that was howling/barking. My neighbour got home from a holiday to a near naked man in her yard with a seemingly unlikely reason for being there. Hi Tracy, sorry about for being on your property in a state of undress.

Rupert Sheldrake is not a polemic, though he explicitly points out outrageous deficiencies in current science. However, he also points out correctly that many of these deficiencies are admitted by current science. Science is arrogant and has always tended to be so, but it is also unsure and in some ways humble in its arrogance and so it is a paradox. Science needs people like Sheldrake. It should not and must not reject him or people like him. They are the canary in the coalmine.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

please list the outrageous deficiencies of science.

@TheBasicTruth

5 жыл бұрын

@@dankahraman354, the outrageous deficiencies of science makes for a long list. There's not enough space here to list them but I could prioritise a few. 1 - Scientists are losing the fight to communicate science to the public in a way that is commonly understood. 2 - Scientists are permitting bogus science to become recognised as popular science, when it's not science. 3 - Bullets 1 and 2 embrace the problem of science being misunderstood against invalid arguments that are popular. 4 - Some scientists, and non-scientists masquerading as scientists, are giving science a bad name by not using science. That's probably enough to be going on with.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

@@TheBasicTruth cite examples under the 4 headings you listed. You haven't done anything of the sort.

@yancowles

5 жыл бұрын

How is science arrogant? Isn't science a methodology used to try understand and explain phenomena? That's what I understand science to be and I don't see how arrogance can be applied here, please explain.

@biljanapapazovammann2972

5 жыл бұрын

The arrogance from conventional science is to reduce itself to the method and to insist that the world is understandable only through the 5 senses, not to include the intention of the person.In this way the technology is dominating our life and ignore our vision, moral and power. Sorry for my reduced English😉😊

No real scientist would agree with that opening statement.

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

@Mr Best Policy Yes the guy with unsubstantiated claims and no evidence is cool but those who doubt are brainwashed.... No scientist would agree with his opening statement, thats why he is not taken seriously. He makes claims without demonstrating them then whines about scientism like he is a victim. People would go ape shit over him if he could prove any of this stuff. Don't fool yourself. Evidence rules BS walks.

@rianczer

2 жыл бұрын

do you mean "science already understands the nature of reality in principle, leaving only the details to be filled in"?

@enkido5838

2 жыл бұрын

yes that is a statement that no scientist would make. It is a position that people who don't understand scientific method might make, given the incredible utility of science in our everyday lives.

@rianczer

2 жыл бұрын

@@enkido5838 how so? is it not the case that science implitly operates under the assumption that, say, we are able to apprehend truth through our sense though?

@enkido5838

2 жыл бұрын

Science develops theories which it tests against evidence. To the extent that evidence supports the theory and the theory has predictive power, it is a useful theory. Every engineering achievememt in history is built on this. It is many decades since Science dropped any thoughts of laws much less truth, in favor of theories and predictive utility. The biggest steps in science are when a theory fails to explain an observation, leading to a new theory which does. If that theory is then supported with evidence it gains credence and utility. Quantum theory is a massive example but Einstein had his moment as did Newton. What science does even more than answer questions is uncover still more things we cannot explain. It would foolhardy in the extreme and profoundly unscientific to think that we have all the tools (theories) we will need to explain innumerable questions which we have not yet even encountered.

Every science understanding is based on measurement and observation. Even theories are cooked up explanation for existing phenomenon (and repeatedly readjust to explain any newer discovered phenomenon). If suppose there are things exist that are absolutely immeasurable or unobservable, then it can neither be proven nor disproven. However, people get off into scientism when they started saying what can't be measure doesn't ever exist...

@brianmi40

2 жыл бұрын

Uh, let me introduce the concept of "inference" to you. Mind blown huh?

Wonderful !!

The whole Sheldrake family is extraordinary, but this guy's my favorite.

We humans (like animals) identify too much with the illusion of fear and desire BUT we evolved from the animal form to discover our true nature as a spiritual being of light incarnated and hence can overcome this illusion and attain a state of inner balance (and return to the original source from whence all came). Such is the game of life and we keep on reincarnating until we achieve this equilibrium within.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

here is your desire for symmetry, another "human" illusion hence a longing for the cosmos to somehow balance the ledger book, if not in this life in the "after-life".

@tatie7604

2 жыл бұрын

Well, I choose Jesus so I can bypass all the reincarnation cycling. It's ridiculous. Who needs it? It won't do any good coming back here.

Some of you misunderstand what he’s doing completely. He isn’t “debunking” science, you can’t debunk observation, what he’s doing is debunking *scientism* , and saying that our modern understanding of science is more of a religion than a process: purely based on presuppositions, that we aren’t *actually scientifically testing* . He wants us to actually use scientific methods to observe and come to conclusions, not just believe the heresy, that’s not what science was intended for. Observation and consciousness are two wonders given to us by God, he doesn’t fear science like the media has portrayed, making it seem as if belief and science are at war with each other, but he wants us to embrace our gifts, because after all, he made us in *his* image. Belief is something we will always need, because there is only so much we can observe. There is a limit, even to science. We will *always* have to believe, we will always have to blindly have faith.

You can actually practice the detection of visual observation. I got really good at it when I worked at music festivals, and I freaked the shit out of my skeptical friend proving it to him. If you are sneaking up on someone or something, do not look directly at them.

Consciousness is no more in the brain then the announcer is in the radio

@loke2860

5 жыл бұрын

@Folk Aart If you break a radio it becomes disturbed and cant channel the radio signals. Same with brains.

@brianmi40

5 жыл бұрын

Exactly where is it then? And if not how can a brain injury result in a split personality, even to the point that one is religious, and the other personality is atheist?

@aliensystem1528

5 жыл бұрын

@Folk Aart you sound like a really bright, reasonable and open minded human being

@madelena1234

5 жыл бұрын

I suggest you go to school too. When i had an accident and broke my leg i had no head injuries by the way, i went unconscious. @Folk Aart

@madelena1234

5 жыл бұрын

so you are saying there signals to channel then? @@loke2860

It's good to see someone who dares mock and point out that science as we know it is wrong thanks Rupert .,.........

It's about smell when you sense someone in the room. I was blown away by this. My friend would always wake up when I walked out of my room when he was sleeping infront of a loud TV with my being 100% quite. Turns out he smelt me and its a defense thing.

@dongorrie1828

2 жыл бұрын

100% quite of quiet?

@jamesmacleod9382

2 жыл бұрын

Is your friend Wolverine?

Wonderful talk. God bless.

this is awesome. i loved Berlinski's book The Devils Delusion when it came out ,this on top of that is great

I like to define science as seeking unknown reality. As we find it, we have to adjust our presentation of knowledge (known reality).

@WisdomThumbs

2 жыл бұрын

That’s a good approach.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

That's not a helpful definition. Magical thinkers tend to distort abstract concepts.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

plus SHaldrake's claims have nothing to do with science or reality.

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

I like to come to agreement with others about terminology, otherwise we can talk and communicate nothing.

@WisdomThumbs

2 жыл бұрын

@@ihatespam2 Same. Different groups have different definitions, but groups with hazy definitions (or a complete lack) tend to fall into groupthink and slide with their chosen news sources on public issues.

Most people: Watch comedy movies and TikTok. Me: Reading the comment sections of external consciousness propositions.

@notloki4169

2 жыл бұрын

if you keep masturbating you'll have to get some tissues

@Taudlitz

2 жыл бұрын

comedy movies makes you laugh, comments on videos like this makes you cry and lose hope in humanity.

How dare the few question the many? common belief and disbelief needs to look at humans as fundamental consciousness (under our beliefs/disbelief's and attachments to 'things') we have been 'corrupt'/'lost' for millennia by belief and disbelief as they are all subjective and hence illusory in themselves. When you bump into a belief you get a strong emotional reaction either way, agreement or disagreement (belief/disbelief fear/shame reactions). 'Mind' in itself is purely a concept and an adjective and based in belief/disbelief (just as personality or ego are as they have 'converlutions'/confusions based on personal perceptions) we are consciousness we are not just a brain/body mechanism and Rupert's summary of when we see things is 'truer' things are projected from the source to the receptacle our brain/body functions interact with our conscious field and our consciousness field is the source. humanity also have another illusory factor that plays havoc with human consciousness and has done for many years namely from the astral sub-reality (in fact human consciousness recently has started using this area of consciousness which is akin to a scratchpad for deeper consciousness to work things out) we are organic consciousness which I call fundamental consciousness (which I loosely hold an understanding that fundamental consciousness can't describe itself so we will fail at this also) We are all connected with this field of fundamental consciousness with all things living and not living. Well theory held by one can be ridiculed until some theory proves it's truer than other theories. I further understand that 'Spirit' and 'soul' are concepts and are belief/disbelief biased also and are 'held' within the 'Astral sub-reality' (left over 'thought' crap from the past).... however, I have my own answers to a lot of my past confusions the this theory and 'mode of operation' of my own personal reality. No one is greater or lesser than myself and no one is lesser or greater then another as we are all the same however we are essentially mirrors of each other, holding onto the similar issues as the other in varying degrees. Science will have to move forward to have other loosely held understandings as one 'pure' constant can only be change :-) as again Rupert depicts in his speeches. 'What Is' depicts 'Things are what they are'

@stephennixey

4 жыл бұрын

@fynes leigh I could ask what is 'blue blazes'? however I think I can understand - As I say above, when people bump into a belief or disbelief people have strong compelling emotional reactions to 'things' and some people even attempt to insult others 😊 I wish you well.

@stephennixey

4 жыл бұрын

@fynes leigh Wow, where did that lot come from!, well unfortunately for some there is ‘disbelief’ also! which is just as problematic as belief (as it’s a 180 opposite) and where does ‘religion’ or the 'god' illusion creep into this exchange of words or is this one of your assumptions? And please, you have no need to answer me you only need to answer this within yourself! As I say I wish you well.

I would like to watch a conversation between Dr Sheldrake and Dr Jordan Peterson!

@Axiomatic75

4 жыл бұрын

I had the same thought just yesterday. Would be fascinating! Rupert talking with Dr. Bruce Lipton would be interesting as well.

@miguelthealpaca8971

4 жыл бұрын

@@Axiomatic75 there's a convo between Sheldrake and Lipton on here.

@carellindeman3492

4 жыл бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/qqWJqKqGj9S-cto.html (sheldrake & lipton)

@surfinmuso37

3 жыл бұрын

Personally i think that would be a conversation between an open mind and a closed one.

@demonmonsterdave

3 жыл бұрын

Why not have a conversation with both yourself? I do it most days.

Love this guy! & he never forget to mention his friend Terrence McKenna. I would be glad to hear him to mention Nikola Tesla too while he talking about mobile phones, Aether and things that Tesla discovered.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

no.such.thing.as.the.ether.

@damonhunter5143

5 жыл бұрын

Oxiigen: I too would like to see Sheldrake expand on some of Tesla' ideas, especially The Aether................God Bless.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

there is no ether unless you are referring to "laughing gas".

@kristenhansen1843

4 жыл бұрын

Forget mobile phones, Tesla once invented a device to communicate with Venusians. I think he even patented it. Sounds like you already have one.

I wish that someone would go back and rework all of this dudes talks because you can usually barely hear him. This one is ok. But he is very soft spoken even in this one.

Scientific 'knowledge' is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty - some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain.

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

And his have no basis in demonstration so are far from certain.

I can "feel" when something is about to happen. For instance someone in another room drops something. I have the preception of tension just before the sound of the object hitting the floor. This happens to me continously throughout the day. Im also quite good at remote viewing.

@mattjames4978

5 жыл бұрын

Nah

@richardfinlayson1524

5 жыл бұрын

there are billions of things happening at any given moment.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

ya right. sounds like a sheldrake delusion.

@mattjames4978

5 жыл бұрын

@@dankahraman354 lol, yeah - people know this guy admits to taking LSD, right? A solid base for logic and reason.

@dankahraman354

5 жыл бұрын

go see Robert Mueller and offer him your services!

Haven't watched the whole video yet, but I have the same views. And I was surprised about how little numbers this story has attracted...

@demonmonsterdave

3 жыл бұрын

The truth is censored and suppressed. Big tech wants to turn you into a soulless consumer.

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

@@demonmonsterdave He has views, without evidence, therefore should be censored from science arenas, because it is dishonest and a waste of time. When he gets evidence for his 50 year old claim, everyone will change their tune.

Ancient Hermetic Axiom: As Above So Below. If man is conscious, everything below is conscious, and everything above is conscious. They may not have our-kind of consciousness, but they have their-kind of consciousness - perfectly suited to carryout their-kind of life.

This is a wonderful talk, and very true as well, as to the delusion as he defines it.

That's really good that the very ridiculed Rupert Sheldrake of "pseudoscience" is in close relation of ideas to the great Donald Hoffman. I do enjoy both of their works. I've not read any of their books though. But Donald Hoffman is a pioneer for holographic principle and for panpsychism.

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

He could easily refute them with evidence. Wonder why he dent do that?

I totally love the way this person's mind works. We need more people who think this clearly and this controversially. I hope Dr. Sheldrake keeps going with these talks which will, in the end, will be referenced by future generations. When Dawkins, Dennett and the rest will have been long forgotten. Bravo!

@kimlowe705

2 жыл бұрын

Andrew Sheehy: The Christian inquisition demanded that people accept this type of delusional belief with threats of punishment or death if you rejected the dogma. Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens, Krauss and others have brought us Freedom From Religions for which we are most grateful. Lest we forget! A return to the delusions of religious dogma and other delusional or conspiracy theories are not what is needed.

@andrewsheehy2441

2 жыл бұрын

@@kimlowe705 I cannot understand how the many ideas advanced in this talk could be classified as a “delusional belief”. A lot of the thinking is sound. Suggest you check out the extraordinary work being done by people like Michael Levin who represent the future. In contrast, Dennett - as an example - has spent decades writing multiple books that - ironically - prove that he doesn’t understand what consciousness is.

@richardgomes5420

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, his mind is so clear. "I'm just a scientist", so here you are my preferred deities which explain everything I don't know how to explain in the first place! Wherever he sees a gap in Science, his brilliant sharp mind is ready to insert an angel to fill the gap and explain how it work. Utterly brilliant. Only a sharp, accurate scientific minded person would be capable to arrive to such brilliant realization.

@andrewsheehy2441

2 жыл бұрын

@@richardgomes5420 I really don't understand the 'passive-aggressive' nature of your comment. Dr. Sheldrake's reference to 'angels' was to provide historic context (Descartes advanced that idea). If you'd like to have an actual debate then let me know here and I'll share with you a simple way to falsify materialisim and then you can come back to be with a challenge to the thinking that I'll lay out. But, please, let's focus on the thinking not the person.

All the assumptions that he questions have their root in the null hypothesis. If you don’t accept the null hypothesis, then he is correct. But if you think scientifically, you accept the null hypothesis as true until there is enough evidence to prove it incorrect. Then, once you accept the null hypothesis and what is needed to prove it wrong in any claim, scientists look at likelihoods. And the reason we assume materialism is because it is more likely, not because it is necessarily true. As such, until you can prove it wrong, it remains a valid assumption. It certainly doesn’t hurt to question these assumptions, but just questioning them alone don’t make the lessor likelihoods any more true.

@justbreakingballs

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly. He says Terrance says science is give us one miracle and we will explain the rest, but this seems give us just miracles and we will explain nothing. I mean I agree with Terrance and Rupert to a degree to the point nothing can ever be explained fully as the question why always exists that any known knowledge but science seems the best way forward forward in explaining what can never be fully explained

@jmarkinman

2 жыл бұрын

@James Strawn Your comment is a bit loaded, but essentially, in the context of this video, not true. You can measure likelihoods based on what you already know to be true.

Interestingly, very often when I am, say, walking behind a woman and admiring some specific aspect of her, she will reach around and straighten/fidget with the general region where I was looking as if a wave of modesty swept over her. I had chalked it up to either women regularly checking/adjusting their appearance or having perceived me simply being back there "somewhere" (the sound of walking, or having passed me just before for example).

@Reignor99

2 жыл бұрын

I tried this method by staring at the back of my teacher's head really hard. Within 10 seconds he vigorously scratched it. It was kinda spooky. I didn't try it again.

His criticism of science is correct. His alternative theory is bogus. The examples he gives as arguments for his theory in the second half are ironically already explained by science

@ihatespam2

2 жыл бұрын

HIs criticism can sometimes be correct. But if he could demonstrate his claims, scientist would be all over it.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

which points do you find correct???

@snn7c883

4 ай бұрын

"Explained by science" doesn't mean that our science has found the ultimate truth in a topic. You can explain and explain away basically everything, doesn't matter if it is true or not or if your explenation is true or not.

First, dark energy is not actually inconsistent with conservation of energy, at least as things are currently understood (assuming dark energy turns out to be real, as that hasn't been proven yet). I completely understand why that is confusing, but it is really because we tend to use a naive understanding of what "energy" is. The math is a bit too complicated to go into in a KZread comment (and there are some things, mostly in quantum mechanics, that do seem like they violate the principle), but, in short, altough it sounds like dark energy is being created out of nothing in violation of the first law of thermodynamics, there is also a negative contribution of gravitational energy (a repulsive force) due to the dynamic expansion of space itself. As space expands, the magnitude of this negative gravitational energy increases by an amount that exactly equals the dark energy itself. So, in the end if you account for both the dark energy and this negative gravitational energy, the total energy of the universe is constantly conserved. It's a good thing, as if we lose conservation of energy, then Lagrangian mechanics stop working, and that would be bad. Also, my dogs are so dumb that, every time I take a bath, they panic because they think I am drowning; so I am extremely skeptical about their psychic powers.

@brontehauptmann4217

2 жыл бұрын

Dark energy is as real as dark matter and black holes which is to say that like the Oort cloud, they exist only in the minds of theoretical physics mystic kabbalists and NOT in the real world. Most of your post belongs in the toilet except the part about your dog being stupid and lacking in psychic ability.

@Pandaemoni

2 жыл бұрын

@@brontehauptmann4217 You clearly have less trust in science than most if you don't believe in black holes or the Oort Cloud, as those are considered well-established now.

Why would anyone want to ban this talk? Are they afraid?

I have for years been saying that science and technology are not the same things and that one does not necessarily validate the other.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

They are not the same thing but they both feed each other. Science enables technological advances and Technology enables new observations and discovery of new facts.

@dennisjump8655

2 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 I don't need to understand hydrodynamics to make a simple water wheel to irrigate or draw water. While they are obviously intertwined, people make the mistake of confusing the two. " My iPhone is amazing so their other theories must be true". The assumption being that technological advancement automatically equals understanding. My point is there is a need for caution, and not accepting at face value the claims or theories of much of what is passing as 'science' these days. A lot of wild, ridiculous theories out there being presented as though they are fact, with the average person allowing themselves into being cowed because of technology.

I think Sheldrake is a great communicator, and like many such he has a fantastic grasp of the problems and he explains them brilliantly. His explanation here of what waves are was the best I've ever heard, and is one I will remember. However, like many great communicators (from Sagan to Peterson) his proposals fall short. The idea of the mind projected is interesting, but could also be explained and expanded by including Hameroff and Penrose's ideas about the quantum nature of the mind. Still, a wonderfully engaging talk.

@WDeeGee1

2 жыл бұрын

Every proposal to explain reality will always fall short. Any description will always fall short of the real thing. Why? Descriptions are limited by the human mind, whereas reality itself is quite possibly intricate beyond what the human mind can ever describe, much like how a bloodcell is incapable of describing the human realm.

@nickolasgaspar9660

2 жыл бұрын

-"but could also be explained and expanded by including Hameroff and Penrose's ideas about the quantum nature of the mind." -Mind properties rise at a biological level, chemical properties at a molecular level and kinetic/energetic properties are the only type of properties that can be found at aquantum level. Projecting Advanced properties (mind) at a fundamental level is PSEUDO SCIENCE. It is against the current Scientific Paradigm, which is responsible for the epistemic run away success of science for the last 500 years. In order for such an idea to be scientific, first we need to have evidence for the ability of quantum system to carry /produce such advanced properties and then prove that a specific property manifested in the classical world is projected solely by a quantum mechanism. We can say for sure that quantum mechanisms do play role in some classical phenomena (photosynthesis, bird navigation etc) but the contribution in them is always a kinetic property. BTW HAmeroff and Penrose don't share the same conclusions. Hameroff idea is way woower than Penrose's.

@periurban

2 жыл бұрын

@@WDeeGee1 I cannot disagree with that. Most of our questions are based around our humanity. Those questions which might arise from mathematics or other formalisms are often so abstruse as to render them meaningless to ordinary experience. I feel as if we are villagers in a Minecraft game, looking at the world and wondering why it's configured in multiples of 16. The James Webb Telescope is going to provide some very important information to our philosophical discussions, both from a cosmological and spiritual perspective. The possibility of confirming Earth-like planets, and discovering if the nature of the early universe is as predicted, will go a long way towards expanding our understanding of what's really going on.

@periurban

2 жыл бұрын

@@nickolasgaspar9660 I think your skepticism is warranted, but considering we are here discussing this under a video of Rupert Sheldrake perhaps we can allow ourselves a little imaginative leeway? lol The great thing about Orch-OR is that it can be tested experimentally, and it isn't necessarily the case that the whole mechanism of mind described by the theory relies only on quantum events. There's a whole bunch of molecular activities leading to neuronal activity, which are occurring inside the microtubules at levels way below the neurons themselves. It makes sense to me that synaptic neural functioning alone is insufficient to explain the phenomenon of consciousness. I read Penrose's The Emperor's New Mind when it first came out, and I think he made a pretty good case for the idea that consciousness could not be computational, and I agree with his rejection of the neuronal model as being completely insufficient to describe the observed phenomena. I don't have any problem with the "woo". Just as long as I keep in mind that it is "woo", but for me there is something inherently "woo" in my experience of being human, of externalizing the world, and moving through it. Anyway, time will tell, because someone is going to test Orch-OR and see if it works or not.

I love this guy!

@Dr.mandril

Жыл бұрын

More people need to hear about this video, spread the word. Share to your friend and on tik tok for younger audiences.

Did you notice everything runs, vehicles, devices, bodies and the creation. A timetable part of creation too

The spirit influences the body by just being the spirit it always been. The physical is like the spirit not vise versa