Well, I'm not the minority view. People who share my views aren't usually the loudest voices, though. It's so easy to target someone like Billy Graham because he makes specific claims.Well, reddit is really more like youtube comments. I guess I meant forums on the internet.
I've noticed that whatever you think about psi, it seems to not be predicated on the suckiness/stupidity of skeptics, lyace. :)
I've never quite figured out why there is so much interest in the label and packaging people put on these "worldviews". Shouldn't the goal just be to try and figure out what's going on? Focussing on world views just emphasizes our triballistic natures. Yes these drives are built in but why give in to them given their evolutionary origins are no longer necessary?
In the end, approaching these topics from a worldview standpoint reduces our ability to overcome our cognitive biases. It turns discussions into cheerleading for the favourite team and it serves as a perpetual distraction as well as fostering driving wedges between people.
This forum has seen a great deal of this. Why not try and bust the cycle?
Part of what Alex has tried to do is to say that we're all in the same boat. We all have our world-view and our agenda and we'll all defend it come what may. The idea is that just as believers desperately hope that there is an afterlife, free-will, love and meaning and purpose, so non-believers desperately hope (for some bizarre reason) that there is no afterlife, free-will, love or meaning and purpose. This is very implausible on the face of it, so he has to try to come up with some kind of very complicated conspiracy theory about why they hope for this. For example, they hope we're biological robots with no free-will so we can just go on shopping and blowing each other up or whatever. The whole thing makes no sense, but this is the kind of thing he has to say.
People in a position of accountability and influence are not asked to make compromises they are forced to make compromises. If I were a betting man, I would bet the house that Sheldrake and Radin believe in an afterlife.But yeah, I take your point. I should be a bit more careful before I start accusing Sheldrake and Radin of believing certain things.
When I see you or one of the other prominent skeptics here move one iota from the entrenched position of denying anything that questions scientism/physicalism/atheism then I might believe you are not defending a worldview. You make such a show of being Mr. Reasonable but your tune never changes and your staunch defence of everything uttered by Paul and fls suggests a team mentality.
How about you busting the cycle? Why not pick a subject - or a single piece of evidence - that you think might reasonably challenge your worldview and defend it in the face of skeptical criticism?
I've participated in threads before where I took the other side. But Kamarling, my way of testing my own beliefs is to set out my position as clearly as I can and look for engagement by those who disagree with me.
His not so rational distain stems from the antipathy shown by the scientific community for his rather poorly supported what if ideas.I just did a text search on Sheldrake's 'Science Set Free', and it turns out he doesn't use the word 'afterlife' even once, and the only time he uses the word 'immortality' is to criticize the transhumanist obsession with living forever! So I guess there must be some other explanation for Sheldrake's irrational fear and hatred of materialism/atheism!
We love you guys!So, basically, what you're saying is that you need us proponents? ;-)
Minus a handful of members all the rest do seem to hate materialism and perhaps even its 1st cousin scienceWhy do I use the word 'hate'? Well, take a philosopher like David Chalmers. He may think that philosophical materialism is false, but for him this really is a purely intellectual position. There is never any sense that he hates materialism or thinks it's to blame for all the evils in the world.
However, if you listen to interviews with people like Sheldrake and Radin, there is often the sense that materialism is somehow to blame for war, consumerism, technology worship, greed, alienation, and all the rest.
Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word 'hate' here, but there is something different about the paranormal believer on the one hand and the anti-materialist philosopher on the other.
In any case, with Alex, I think we can all agree that he does 'hate' atheism/materialism.
In any case, with Alex, I think we can all agree that he does 'hate' atheism/materialism.
That’s crapMinus a handful of members all the rest do seem to hate materialism and perhaps even its 1st cousin science
Notice I said seem too hate.That’s crap
You put almost any “proponent” on this forum next to a radical religious fundamentalist and they would appear as an atheist or next to a raving newager who divines everyone’s Karma off the top of their head or a Sylvia brown and they would come off as a militant skeptic. It’s context dependant. You seem to see things in black and white and caricaturize proponents by selective viewing with a lot of you own projections. People in general on this forum are far more nuanced and thoughtful in their views except perhaps a few.
Seem to hate and hating are equal for all practical purposes in the way you used it. By you insinuating that members of this forum seem to hate materialism, and the a greater effect science, you're stating that they act in a way in which would make one conclude that they hate science. I have seen no one on this forum claim to hate materialism or science, and no one yet has outright act as if they do. In fact, most people are trying to use scientific knowledge to disprove materialistic assumptions.Notice I said seem too hate.
Minus a handful of members all the rest do seem to hate materialism and perhaps even its 1st cousin science
Notice I said seem too hate.
Maybe "hate" is a strong word but you and others appear to want to be cocooned from steve001's "materialist" views in the greater part of the skeptiko arena...And what is the subtle difference between seem and seem, can you expand? How else should we interpret what you posted?
Maybe "hate" is a strong word but you and others appear to want to be cocooned from steve001's "materialist" views in the greater part of the skeptiko arena...
So, basically, what you're saying is that you need us proponents? ;-)
Arouet, what you say is fine. But, whether, or not, you are sincere, you're still just one person. If you look throughout history, as well as modern-day science, one of the always prominent road blocks to progress is entrenched world-views. The topic doesn't even have to be religious/spiritual in nature. Within physics, there are many "materialistic" minded scientists concerned today about the new "worldview" forming out of multiverse theory, etc, a big part of which comes from a certain way of viewing nature
I think to say worldviews aren't a problem when it comes to psi getting its fair shake is naive. Don't ya think? So, whether, or not, we here on this forum "bust the cycle" it's still a big hurdle in the world at large.
Also, I don't think most proponents need the engagement you do for them to have confidence in their own views. Some of the frustration you might feel here is trying to engage folks in a type of discussion they don't need, or want and have more than likely moved past.