Mod+ Ugly, Hateful Bias from the Mainstream Press

#1
Latest article looking at mainstream bias:

http://weilerpsiblog.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/ugly-hateful-bias-from-the-mainstream-press/

The New Republic carried this headline on one of their articles: Pseudoscientist Rupert Sheldrake Is Not Being Persecuted, And Is Not Like Galileo by Jerry Coyne. My jaw dropped. It’s no surprise that Coyne authored the piece of course, his blog writing is full of such hysteria and slander. In fact, this is a reprint of one of his blog posts. What shocked me was that no one at the New Republic thought that this type of slander was out of line.
 

Ian Gordon

Ninshub
Member
#2
Ouch. Maybe this will backfire on Coyne, perhaps? It certainly doesn't make him look good.

The "like" is for you and your article Craig, btw, not Coyne's article. ;)
 
#3
Awww, poor Jerry you know we can't blame him, he has no choice because in his own words...
free will is ruled out, simply and decisively, by the laws of physics. Your brain and body, the vehicles that make "choices," are composed of molecules, and the arrangement of those molecules is entirely determined by your genes and your environment. Your decisions result from molecular-based electrical impulses and chemical substances transmitted from one brain cell to another. These molecules must obey the laws of physics, so the outputs of our brain -- our "choices" -- are dictated by those laws.
Which then of course logicaly precludes him from distinguishing right from wrong and any ability to recognize what is true and what is not. He cuts off the very slender branch he rests upon.

Personally I think his actions and words derive from an insecurity regarding his own faith. Once again in his own words.

In science's pecking order, evolutionary biology lurks somewhere near the bottom, far closer to phrenology than to physics.
 
#5
Awww, poor Jerry you know we can't blame him, he has no choice because in his own words...


Which then of course logicaly precludes him from distinguishing right from wrong and any ability to recognize what is true and what is not. He cuts off the very slender branch he rests upon.

Personally I think his actions and words derive from an insecurity regarding his own faith. Once again in his own words.
I've been wondering that myself. Surely a true materialist knows that minds can't be changed, minds don't even exist! People will believe what they believe in purely as a product of deterministic processes.

So... the only reason they would speak out is... to let people know they were born with the wrong brain and should feel bad...?
 

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Nap, interrupted.
Member
#6
I've been wondering that myself. Surely a true materialist knows that minds can't be changed, minds don't even exist! People will believe what they believe in purely as a product of deterministic processes.
Some of which processes might be assumed by materialists to involve "changing the person's mind."

~~ Paul
 
Last edited:
#7
I've been wondering that myself. Surely a true materialist knows that minds can't be changed, minds don't even exist! People will believe what they believe in purely as a product of deterministic processes.
Hagbard, this is a mod+ thread. Your post could be interpreted in a manner that suggests the possibility that minds may not be separate from brains. That's off-limits for this thread.
 
#8
Hagbard, this is a mod+ thread. Your post could be interpreted in a manner that suggests the possibility that minds may not be separate from brains. That's off-limits for this thread.
His post has been marked by other people as funny. In any case he's making a point about the absurdity of determinism, so he's not out of bounds.
 
#10
Ok, so you don't object to discussions about whether determinism is true or not in your mod+ threads? Thanks for the clarification, so I'll respond:

I don't know Coyne's view on determinism but I'll share mine, which I've posted before. Our thoughts, ideas, opinions take place in the context of a web of cause and effect, with possibily some randomness thrown in. The arguments Coyne makes, our reactions to them, our responses to them take place in this complex web. So do our deliberations. That is, if we went back in time an instant before our last decision, taking the universe exactly as it was at that instance, subject to randomness (STR) I think we'd make the same decision each time.

This is not determinism in the sense that some playwright has mapped everything out in advance. Our decisions making processes are real and important parts of the web chain.
 
#11
Ok, so you don't object to discussions about whether determinism is true or not in your mod+ threads? Thanks for the clarification, so I'll respond:

I don't know Coyne's view on determinism but I'll share mine, which I've posted before. Our thoughts, ideas, opinions take place in the context of a web of cause and effect, with possibily some randomness thrown in. The arguments Coyne makes, our reactions to them, our responses to them take place in this complex web. So do our deliberations. That is, if we went back in time an instant before our last decision, taking the universe exactly as it was at that instance, subject to randomness (STR) I think we'd make the same decision each time.

This is not determinism in the sense that some playwright has mapped everything out in advance. Our decisions making processes are real and important parts of the web chain.
I think you drew the wrong conclusions from my last statement. Hagbard N was within the assumption that mind does not equal brain because he was demonstrating the absurdity of determinism.
At any rate, thanks for your opinion on the matter of determinism. I don't mind you sharing it, although it's not a conversation that I'm personally interested in.
 
#12
I think you drew the wrong conclusions from my last statement. Hagbard N was within the assumption that mind does not equal brain because he was demonstrating the absurdity of determinism.
At any rate, thanks for your opinion on the matter of determinism. I don't mind you sharing it, although it's not a conversation that I'm personally interested in.
Well, determinism may be true or not whether or not mind=brain. I was more referring to the fact that he stated that there is no mind which I thought opened up that debate.
 
#13
Oh I'm not debating whether mind = brain, to do that I'd have to have one of those first, preferably both if I were to be perfectly objective, and I'm not quite sure that I do.
In any case, just poking fun, feel free to take a jab my pet peeves! If you want a list of those, send PM with subject "what are your major malfunctions".

I'm not sure I understand your ideas of determinism arouet, is there a version of determinism compatible with agency and choice?

If it's like you say, there is only universal physical laws and a factor or randomness, then wouldn't what feels like free will to us be just the result of a machine with a randomness routine built into it?

Unless the laws of physics includes free will, or free will can "maneuver" within the space of randomness?

If a law dictates that you have free will, then is it still free?

I might be in danger of running into myself from behind here.
 
#14
If a law dictates that you have free will, then is it still free?
I totally agree with everything you said in response to Arouet's peculiar brand of determinism. I just wanted to highlight your question. IN my opinion, a law dictating you have free will ( forcing you to be free ) is a contradiction in terms. One cannot exercise free will because one is mandated to do so. Just like one cannot love freely under pain of death.
 
#15
Getting back to the original subject, I've been reading the comment sections for both articles and I'm beginning to think that Coyne is the best thing that's ever happened to psi researchers. It's impossible for ordinary people not to notice his over the top bias and trashy, evidence free arguments. He's getting creamed in the comment section. It's kind of like the TED controversy. The skeptics make things worse for themselves.
 
#16
Well, this is embarrassing, looks like you're on to us.

k I fess up, people like jerry coyne and ted's anonymous science panel are actually secret illuminati operatives, not the fake one you hear about being all sinister and manipulating global policy and finance,
but the real one ran by a circle of 5, which the only known member is the dalai lama whose goal is to bring about the total transcendental illumination of man kind.

As you can see they only hire the best.

Don't tell anyone.

This message has already self destructed 5 universes ago.
 
#17
Well, this is embarrassing, looks like you're on to us.

k I fess up, people like jerry coyne and ted's anonymous science panel are actually secret illuminati operatives, not the fake one you hear about being all sinister and manipulating global policy and finance,
but the real one ran by a circle of 5, which the only known member is the dalai lama whose goal is to bring about the total transcendental illumination of man kind.

As you can see they only hire the best.

Don't tell anyone.

This message has already self destructed 5 universes ago.
Looks like the self destruct failed in this universe. Tough luck. :(
 
#18
Tough luck indeed, I calculate the odds of this message being seen in this particular universe at 1 in 10^42.
But as I've famously said, give me enough universes and I'll make 1 in 10^42 happen 9 times out of 10.
 
#19
Tough luck indeed, I calculate the odds of this message being seen in this particular universe at 1 in 10^42.
But as I've famously said, give me enough universes and I'll make 1 in 10^42 happen 9 times out of 10.
I try to leave these scenarios to the pandimensional superior beings known to us as white mice. It's too much for my brain. I'll just grab my towel, my HGttU and hope for the best.

Apropos of absolutely nothing, when do we get to cash in our ratings points for dollars? That's part of the new forum isn't it?
 
#20
I try to leave these scenarios to the pandimensional superior beings known to us as white mice. It's too much for my brain. I'll just grab my towel, my HGttU and hope for the best.

Apropos of absolutely nothing, when do we get to cash in our ratings points for dollars? That's part of the new forum isn't it?
I think I'm gonna owe money :( Next time your passing through NZ Craig, I'll pay you....
 
Top