Mod+ Deepak Chopra's challenge to skeptics

I just mean that the idea of 'indirect perception' seems reasonably logical from Lands work on colour perception, optical illusions and dream recollections. Where you go from there is up to you. Just getting to 'indirect perception' is a major achievement in my view.
Gotcha.

Pat
 

If you've got the idea of indirect perception (which I think is crucial), James Gibson's work on 'visual perception', and 'affordances' raises some valid issues which challenge it...

This 1 hour lecture is a reasonable introduction to some of Gibson's ideas...

 
I'd be curious if psychologists could use a gathering like TAM to get some research findings.

For example, when skeptics debate on the internet or even just insult anyone who isn't a materialist evangelist, do they receive a level of self-satisfaction & pride approaching that of a police officer protecting a neighborhood or a soldier fighting in a war? And does this sense of vigilance/battle depend on the claim they are arguing against, or does some liberal New Age idea of a Goddess blessing arouse the same ire & subconscious threat level as an argument with someone who thinks women should be forced by police to dress in burkas 24/7?

Another idea would be to announce that some OBE had produced undeniable veridical results and get a measure of the responses. I suspect there would be a lot of anger, but also a good deal of fear. Tart has discussed his own need to escape what he saw as a confining feeling brought up by his religious upbringing. It was only with time that he could get his subconscious to realize that materialism being false did not automatically elide into reactionary religious interpretation being true.

Similarly, one might ask participants to explain if/why materialism being true would elide into an adoption of secular humanism.
 
Thanks, Andy. I had hoped people like Bart could follow the spirit of the mod+ designation for this thread when I started it. It's unfortunate that posters are being driven away from the forum by the skeptical cadre.
Driven away? You mean just from this sub forum? Granted, there's not much traffic on the others...

Provocatively posting a mod+ thread (about Chopra of all things!) on the CD sub forum and then complaining about the response seems a little precious.
 
Driven away? You mean just from this sub forum? Granted, there's not much traffic on the others...

Provocatively posting a mod+ thread (about Chopra of all things!) on the CD sub forum and then complaining about the response seems a little precious.
I've asked the mods to move this thread to another part of the forum and delete all skeptical commentary. I had originally thought it would be unfair to post it where you couldn't respond to such criticism. But responding to criticism is quite different than just trolling the forum as per usual. I have to hand it to the CSI/JREF minions, they are well organized and even with such a small amount of leeway they can ruin any decent forum. I think Alex made a mistake letting you do to this forum what was done to the old forum.
 
Yeah, I don't even know how you, Pat, would be like a skeptic. I just remember an accusation someone making a while back..: I'm not being serious. If anything, I'm making fun of the accusation. Really, I just wanted to call someone a fluffer. And I'm using that term literally/professionally.

Okay, I'll direct my cyber bulling solely at Arouet from now on. He's more than enough work as it is.
 
Some more thoughts on the faith that is materialist/skeptical evangelism:

There are people who are simply driven by sincere curiosity about the nature of reality and find materialism (with perhaps a dash of largely ineffectual panpsychism) the most compelling option, and then there are those who see immaterialism as a threat that requires a strong response. Apparently they see a supposedly strong causal link where any immaterialism leads to encroachment of the "Church" on secular democracy. This fear has been discussed by Chalmers and Searle.

Atheist Gary Wolf discussed how ridiculous this supposed slippery slope is, and I think it's rather obvious after a moment of reflection. A variety of other personages in that thread have noted the cultish thinking of those who see any and all immaterialism as a threat to modernity and secular democracy.

So if the overreach of the evangelical materialist seems obvious to many - including some who would identify as materialists or at least atheists - what drives people to enlist in the battle against supposedly "irrational" thinking? I suspect the reasons given in The Pathology of Organized Skepticism - bad experiences with religion growing up leading to desire for retrocausal vengeance and/or self-loathing for prior gullibility leading to projection about the mental susceptibility of others. There's likely some subconscious adherence to the False Dilemma that the only choices are materialism or Dark Age religious reactionary attitudes, given End of Materialism author Tart recalling the sense of freedom that came when the materialist-based Western Creed allowed him freedom from decades of conditioned faith-based guilt regarding sexuality and the notion of sin.

Beyond that there's a more general assessment to be made of internet activism in the modern age. A desired outlet for aggression & status combined with a desire for a meaningful existence. By adopting the hard line against immaterialism, a materialist evangelical claiming skepticism is able to act as though s/he is an intellectually superior being participating in a Chaoskampf where the stakes are nothing less than the future of civilization via the advancement of secular humanism.

As I mentioned above TAM 2014 would be a good place to research my hypothesis, but I suspect the Eye of Skepticism wouldn't want to be turned upon itself.

<<insert appropriate smiley>>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks. I loved this passage:

And in our technology-obsessed culture, we tragically filled the gap with the spokespeople of science. Having done so, we now find ourselves in the insane position of expecting wisdom and guidance from – pardon my blatant sincerity – semi-conscious nerds; intellectual specialists who can solve abstract mathematical puzzles but are largely disconnected from life and the depths of their own psyche.
 
Back
Top