Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
The Science Delusion
SattvaPaul
South Wales, UK Veteran
When looking for Dawkin's "God Delusion", I discovered this title by Rupert Sheldrake. Due to be released in January. Looks like it may be an exciting read:
The Science Delusion by Rupert Sheldrake
The science delusion is the belief that science already understands the nature of reality. The fundamental questions are answered, leaving only the details to be filled in. In this book, Dr Rupert Sheldrake, one of the world's most innovative scientists, shows that science is being constricted by assumptions that have hardened into dogmas. The sciences would be better off without them: freer, more interesting, and more fun.
According to the dogmas of science, all reality is material or physical. The world is a machine, made up of dead matter. Nature is purposeless. Consciousness is nothing but the physical activity of the brain. Free will is an illusion. God exists only as an idea in human minds, imprisoned within our skulls.
But should science be a belief-system, or a method of enquiry? Sheldrake shows that the materialist ideology is moribund; under its sway, increasingly expensive research is reaping diminishing returns.
In the skeptical spirit of true science, Sheldrake turns the ten fundamental dogmas of materialism into exciting questions, and shows how all of them open up startling new possibilities.
The Science Delusion will radically change your view of what is possible. and give you new hope for the world.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Science-Delusion-Rupert-Sheldrake/dp/1444727923
The Science Delusion by Rupert Sheldrake
The science delusion is the belief that science already understands the nature of reality. The fundamental questions are answered, leaving only the details to be filled in. In this book, Dr Rupert Sheldrake, one of the world's most innovative scientists, shows that science is being constricted by assumptions that have hardened into dogmas. The sciences would be better off without them: freer, more interesting, and more fun.
According to the dogmas of science, all reality is material or physical. The world is a machine, made up of dead matter. Nature is purposeless. Consciousness is nothing but the physical activity of the brain. Free will is an illusion. God exists only as an idea in human minds, imprisoned within our skulls.
But should science be a belief-system, or a method of enquiry? Sheldrake shows that the materialist ideology is moribund; under its sway, increasingly expensive research is reaping diminishing returns.
In the skeptical spirit of true science, Sheldrake turns the ten fundamental dogmas of materialism into exciting questions, and shows how all of them open up startling new possibilities.
The Science Delusion will radically change your view of what is possible. and give you new hope for the world.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Science-Delusion-Rupert-Sheldrake/dp/1444727923
0
Comments
As a non-scientist but edgumacated bystander, the problem I see is that the "dogmas of science" listed above are bogus. Also materialism is a buzzword by believers in ghosts and psychic powers and such to denote the enemy: people who insist on actual evidence to support conclusions.
Science is not a set of beliefs or even assumptions, but a method of enquiry that leads to conclusions. First, you must provide clear evidence that something exists. Then, it becomes something that science can examine and explain.
For the most part, scientists believed in Newtonian physics, which was very mechanical and materialistic, for a long time. However, recently, we have begun to see that things on a smaller level (i.e. electrons) do not always act predictably, as Newtonian physics says they should. So, quantum theory was created in an attempt to explain why certain things happen. There are numerous parts of this theory and not all scientists agree with their premises. A lot of it is hypothetical stuff, not backed up by facts (such as string theory). These hypothesis as put as "fact" by people such as Deepak Chopra or Rupert Sheldrake which is incorrect. Sure, they could be correct, but if you look at the evidence for and against, you still end up at "could be, but we don't know." Its the same logic with the existence of the Judeo-Christian God. He could exist, but we don't know. / all of this is coming from a guy with a 10th grade public education. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong
I'm a big Dawkins fan because he actually knows what he is talking about when he says stuff. He just doesn't make stuff up or put things as fact unless they have substantial evidence for it.
I got a video for your anti-science people:
To me what the Buddha teaches is subjective knowledge. We still have to put it through a rigorous testing to find out the truth of it. Today we can look at the results of fMRI scans and medical studies to objectivly see that the methods work. I wonder how all the people who practiced Buddhism succesfully in the past managed to do so without a proper study to let them know if they were right or not?
Science is great and the benefits have worked wonders for humanity. The error, in my view, that some make is not waiting for proof before believing in something but the active assertion that without proof something isn't true.
Real science doesn't have dogma, true. But that doesn't stop some from turning it into one.