What's the problem with Chopra?

S

Sciborg_S_Patel

#1
Curious why this guy gets such a bad rap?

Doesn't seem like he's saying stuff much different than the Dalai Lama or various Idealist scientists & philosophers, and AFAIK he wasn't shacking up with anyone committing ID theft like Randi nor accused of sexual assault like Shermer.

Just curious if there's good reason to dislike him or it's just a smear campaign by materialist evangelicals?
 
#2
Curious why this guy gets such a bad rap?

Doesn't seem like he's saying stuff much different than the Dalai Lama or various Idealist scientists & philosophers, and AFAIK he wasn't shacking up with anyone committing ID theft like Randi nor accused of sexual assault like Shermer.

Just curious if there's good reason to dislike him or it's just a smear campaign by materialist evangelicals?
I don't like him because he's made a shit load of cash off writing books that are for the most part, complete nonsense. It's also annoying that Dean associates himself with chopra.
 
#4
Curious why this guy gets such a bad rap?

Doesn't seem like he's saying stuff much different than the Dalai Lama or various Idealist scientists & philosophers, and AFAIK he wasn't shacking up with anyone committing ID theft like Randi nor accused of sexual assault like Shermer.

Just curious if there's good reason to dislike him or it's just a smear campaign by materialist evangelicals?
I've heard several times over decades from people in the publishing industry that all of his books are ghost written - not in the paranormal sense:).
 
S

Sciborg_S_Patel

#5
Thanks guys. I'd read some stuff on Wikipedia but given how pseudo-skeptics have corrupted the site I wasn't sure what to trust on there.

I can see Chopra's Quantum Healing thing being an issue, but is that any crazier than Lisa Rankin advocating the healing power of the Placebo Effect at TED? Has he ever told people to not see actual doctors?
 
#6
Curious why this guy gets such a bad rap?

Doesn't seem like he's saying stuff much different than the Dalai Lama or various Idealist scientists & philosophers, and AFAIK he wasn't shacking up with anyone committing ID theft like Randi nor accused of sexual assault like Shermer.

Just curious if there's good reason to dislike him or it's just a smear campaign by materialist evangelicals?
I was surprised to learn that Chopra and Shermer are actually quite good friends. Shermer, by the way, has also made a good living out of writing about "woo". Perhaps they need each other.

I think there are certain well known people who have become stereotypical bogeymen. Their names always crop up: Geller, Chopra, von Daniken, Icke, etc. They are often their own worst enemies, claiming things that most reasonable proponents would find difficult to swallow. So the proponents can say, look, I'm also skeptical - I wouldn't buy a Chopra book or believe a word Geller says.

For myself, I'm kinda into the anti-guru thing; more a Robert Anton Wilson fan.
 
#7
Perhaps his ideas are positive, but it always seems to me that he misuses scientific terminology - which rather than adding weight to his message, tends to undermine it somewhat.
This is one of my beefs about a number of people of the non-materialist viewpoint.

I wish such people would talk about 'psychic energy' rather than 'energy' unless they really mean something measured in Joules! Likewise for other words - vibration, quantum, magnetic, etc.

David
 
#8
Chopra tends to riff on an idea, which is anathema to reductionists. Sheldrake does the same, but his scientific pragmatism is much nearer the surface. Both are unafraid of 'what if' style questions, which confirms their bogeyman status. How we can explore new avenues without a good dose of what if, I have no idea.
 
#13
I sympathize with Chopra's idealist worldview, but I don't think he's a very rigorous thinker. Moreover, it upsets me when he represents the idealist/paranormal position in debates. There are so many better candidates out there. Why not choose one of them?

He also sells a lot of hokey stuff on his website. I am sorry, but he seems like a slimy snake-oil salesman.
 
S

Sciborg_S_Patel

#17
Coyne just strikes me as incredibly childish and pathetic. I have no doubt of his scientific prowess. But he just comes off as a pugnacious and unpleasant human being. Rude, and demeaning.
Coyne seems like a bundle of contradictions. If there's no free will and no moral realism, why should adherence to Scientific Truth (as he selectively sees it) be relevant at all? Why shouldn't we just believe and publicize comforting conclusions of the Chopra variety as there is no ought to suggest Truth should guide our actions?

But I doubt Coyne has given naturalism's issues with the Is-Ought Problem much consideration.
 
#18
I have read a couple of his books.
Those that are mostly on the subject of spirituality are quite good and I can see why they have become best sellers.

"Quantum Healing" is baffling. He speaks as if he had full understanding of all intricate physiological and psychosomatic aspects of all illnesses.
He makes an unprecedented mishmash of facts, speculations and baseless claims that made my head spin for a while. Some parts of the book are irritating and it's difficult to distillate the good out of it because of all the interspersed nonsense.

I bought the book over 10 years ago and I promised myself I would never, ever buy another one with the word "Quantum" in the title, unless it's written by a physicist :)

p.s. = one thing is for sure: the guy is a marketing genius, he even released console videogames with his brand a couple of years ago.
 
F

Frank Matera

#19
I can see Chopra's Quantum Healing thing being an issue, but is that any crazier than Lisa Rankin advocating the healing power of the Placebo Effect at TED? Has he ever told people to not see actual doctors?
TED's modus operandi is quite obvious. The reason Lisa Rankin advocating the healing power of the Placebo Effect is ok... is because it fits into their materialist paradigm that they push. The Placebo effect has been used in Science for decades... and it has well and truly been shown that placebo effect is real. Science also believes many illnesses and disease are psychosomatic... and that by taking a placebo your brain is tricking the body into feeling better.

So TED aren't as offended by a talk on the healing power of the Placebo effect.... because it's so readily accepted within medicine. The fact that it could actually show that the body has the ability to heal itself through the power of positive thought... would not even occur to these people. I'm sure they just believe it's the brain and neurons doing it's thing.
 
F

Frank Matera

#20
Actually this thread has just reminded me of an exercise we did years ago in a Psychic Development circle I was in. The exercise contained the teacher cutting out from magazines and photos, people's eyes... so that all we saw when doing a reading was the person's eyes. We then had to individually go through and pick up what we felt about each person just by looking into their eyes.. and you had no idea who it was until the end.

It was everyone from Michael Jackson to Mother Theresa to mass murderers and rapists. Deepak Chopra was one of the people she had in the experiment... and you had to put down traits such as whether you would trust this person, whether they were a good person or evil person... what they did etc.

What was interesting is that everyone pretty much nailed the personality type of each person once it was revealed.... if it was a murderer the feelings people got were not good... if it was someone who brought joy... people had feelings of being safe and happy when looking into their eyes. When we got to Deepak Chopra though... nearly everyone in the circle said he was untrustworthy and gave them an uneasy feeling.

When it was revealed that it was Deepak Chopra most people were shocked... as they obviously was expecting someone completely different... but I always remembered that. I don't half wonder if that has something to do with why people do not trust him. What are the eyes giving away that we can't see?
 
Top