I am not even sure where this post should go, but I believe this is the most appropriate section. I hope Alex reads this and responds to it.
One thing that I do not understand when it comes to the consciousness debate, is how people can seem so firmly placed on either side of the fence.
Sometimes when I listen to Alex talk, it seems he is no different than the harsh materialists defending their point of view, rather than standing in objectivity. I suppose we all do this to an extent, some more and some less; however, for someone who is constantly pointing out the fact that OTHERS are doing this, would make me believe or at least hope, Alex would be more aware than your "average" person of when HE is doing the same thing.
Take for example some relatively recent findings relating to consciousness. Stories about individuals who were believed to be, for lack of a better term, "vegetables" , yet are able to show brain responses to visualizing them playing tennis. Reports of people being dead for hours and then coming back to life, such as a recent story in the news about a person who was "cold to the touch" and already entering the state of "rigomortis." (sp). Spikes of brain activity at or around the time of cardiac arrest.
Before I decided to post these questions, I had more examples, which are eluding me now. I bet other members in this forum can think of many more. But the point that I am trying to make is that, it is very obvious that we seemingly know very little about consciousness and how the brain works. But those that accept that position, automatically, at least more often than not, tend to assume that the brain must not be able to account for these experiences and their has to be another explanation. Why does the fact we do not understand a lot about the brain or consciousness have to mean that the brain does not generate it then? It has just as much potential of showing that the brain can and does generate these experiences, but we have no idea how.
My main contention and topic for discussion is how does Alex, or others, seem to sit so firmly on either side of the fence, when it seems as more studies come out, and more research is done, we simply have to admit we have no idea what is going on. We can speculate or form conclusions based on what we currently know, but to say we know one way or the other and be so hard headed in that belief to ridicule others, is silly.
The biggest pet peeve I have with Alex is how certain he feels "consciousness science" or "near death experience science" proves that materialism is false. He seems to be defending a belief or hope in something rather than the objective stance of simply admitting , "wow there are some interesting things going on here, no matter how you look at it, and there is a lot more we need to learn before we can reach any definitive conclusions."
The title of the book, Science is wrong about almost everything, is crazy. Maybe Alex should live in a hut in the middle of the woods. Forget computers, podcasts, tv, cars, mircowaves, stoves, and pretty much every single thing that gives us a good life and makes it easier on us. You can thank science for all that. Medicine, healing, doctors, living a long life, treating disease. Science is to be thanked for that too. Doesnt seem like science is wrong about everything..not even close.
One thing that I do not understand when it comes to the consciousness debate, is how people can seem so firmly placed on either side of the fence.
Sometimes when I listen to Alex talk, it seems he is no different than the harsh materialists defending their point of view, rather than standing in objectivity. I suppose we all do this to an extent, some more and some less; however, for someone who is constantly pointing out the fact that OTHERS are doing this, would make me believe or at least hope, Alex would be more aware than your "average" person of when HE is doing the same thing.
Take for example some relatively recent findings relating to consciousness. Stories about individuals who were believed to be, for lack of a better term, "vegetables" , yet are able to show brain responses to visualizing them playing tennis. Reports of people being dead for hours and then coming back to life, such as a recent story in the news about a person who was "cold to the touch" and already entering the state of "rigomortis." (sp). Spikes of brain activity at or around the time of cardiac arrest.
Before I decided to post these questions, I had more examples, which are eluding me now. I bet other members in this forum can think of many more. But the point that I am trying to make is that, it is very obvious that we seemingly know very little about consciousness and how the brain works. But those that accept that position, automatically, at least more often than not, tend to assume that the brain must not be able to account for these experiences and their has to be another explanation. Why does the fact we do not understand a lot about the brain or consciousness have to mean that the brain does not generate it then? It has just as much potential of showing that the brain can and does generate these experiences, but we have no idea how.
My main contention and topic for discussion is how does Alex, or others, seem to sit so firmly on either side of the fence, when it seems as more studies come out, and more research is done, we simply have to admit we have no idea what is going on. We can speculate or form conclusions based on what we currently know, but to say we know one way or the other and be so hard headed in that belief to ridicule others, is silly.
The biggest pet peeve I have with Alex is how certain he feels "consciousness science" or "near death experience science" proves that materialism is false. He seems to be defending a belief or hope in something rather than the objective stance of simply admitting , "wow there are some interesting things going on here, no matter how you look at it, and there is a lot more we need to learn before we can reach any definitive conclusions."
The title of the book, Science is wrong about almost everything, is crazy. Maybe Alex should live in a hut in the middle of the woods. Forget computers, podcasts, tv, cars, mircowaves, stoves, and pretty much every single thing that gives us a good life and makes it easier on us. You can thank science for all that. Medicine, healing, doctors, living a long life, treating disease. Science is to be thanked for that too. Doesnt seem like science is wrong about everything..not even close.