ImmersiveAmbientModecolor: #d1a297 (color 2)
Video Format : 22 (720p) openh264 ( https://github.com/cisco/openh264) mp4a.40.2 | 44100Hz
Audio Format: Opus - Normalized audio
PokeTubeEncryptID: c1b23e29c59c34ddd3ae95011e33c980ca1998e7c36b3712f78a99893cbdcde42fd97caa42d39ba3ccaf34f9bded81ad
Proxy : eu-proxy.poketube.fun - refresh the page to change the proxy location
Date : 1715991623111 - unknown on Apple WebKit
Mystery text : d3pOZlo4RXNQRkEgaSAgbG92ICB1IGV1LXByb3h5LnBva2V0dWJlLmZ1bg==
143 : true
27,390 Views • Jan 14, 2017 • Click to toggle off description
sheldrake.org/videos/missing-evidence-can-theories…
HUGE THANKS
... to The Institute of Art and Ideas ( iai.tv/ ) for allowing this reproduction.
This is an excerpt from a dialogue at the 2016 "How The Light Gets In" Festival, at Hay-on-Wye, with Rupert Sheldrake, philosopher Massimo Pigliucci and CERN physicist Tara Shears, chaired by Philip Ball.
Here we've selectively followed the back-and-forth between Rupert Sheldrake and Massimo Pigliucci regarding the influence of skeptical organizations and scientific dogma on evidence. Why is the multiverse or many worlds theory okay while telepathy is not?
Source Video Produced by The Institute of Art and Ideas
iai.tv/video/missing-evidence
Views : 27,390
Genre: Science & Technology
Date of upload: Jan 14, 2017 ^^
Rating : 4.863 (19/536 LTDR)
RYD date created : 2022-01-21T09:52:05.972617Z
See in json
YouTube Comments - 90 Comments
Top Comments of this video!! :3
Sheldrake is not only a good and honest scientist but he is also smart and profound in his reply putting the skeptic scientist in difficulty and exposes his bias and limited coherence with his so-called scientific statements, and in this exchange it is very clear the arrogance of the so-called scientific community which Pigliucci supposedly represent.
9 |
Well said Mr. Sheldrake; grace in the presence of hubris, intellectual tenacity in the face of ad hominem-inclined 'skepticism'.
20 |
Rupert is humble and polite. And humorous
12 |
"If I was going to bet, I'd bet against it." That pretty much summed up his argument against the possibility of telepathy. Funny that he felt the need to mention betting--a highly intuitive and superstitious activity.
41 |
Sheldrake is wise in addressing questions regarding the non-material (which is connected to the material) but which mainstream material scientists don't understand and so ironically become dogmatic and closed minded. As Nikola Tesla said, if you wish to understand the Universe you must think of energy, frequency and vibration. Einstein - the only thing of real value is intuition (non-material).
At the end Sheldrake says "why do people that know nothing about subjects feel so strongly they have to form organisations to denounce it and oppose it" - the powers that control the mainstream science community have ulterior motives to keep the human race in ignorance of their true nature as spiritual beings of light (Tesla - everything is the light).
54 |
Massimo is quite hard to listen to, he goes on about a point you already understood from the first couple of words, over explaining - yes we got the idea move on...
Also he interrupts sheldrake a few times and that doesnt happen in the opposite direction.
8 |
What is an extraordinary claim? What constitutes extraordinary evidence? Without clearly stating both of those things, the phrase "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is a license to dismiss anything out of hand. Why is telepathy considered "extraordinary" when it is reported by every culture around the world? It only seems "extraordinary' when viewed from a materialist perspective that holds that it should be impossible without some kind of physical mechanism connecting separate minds. The problem is, there is not a shred of evidence for materialist assumptions and there is no reason to assume them by default. By Occam's Razor, the most logical default position is that mind is fundamental and encompasses the world around us. Massimo Pigliucci has no standing arguments against idealism. He got taken to school by Bernardo Kastrup. If mind is fundamental, then many of the things that should be "impossible" under physicalism may in fact be possible and telepathy doesn't seem so "extraordinary" anymore.
The real "extraordinary woo" is the idea that conscious experience is a temporary and emergent property of "complexity" in non-conscious physical systems. These backwards thinking materialists seem to be willing to assume all kinds of nonsense to avoid having to accept the fundamentality of consciousness.
14 |
''Not believing is not the same as dismissing it'' While that might be true, in the multiverse exemple he gives he dismisses the mathematical evidences and falls back on ''there is no empirical evidence'' switching between the forms of evidence required for shifting beliefs, this is moving the goalpost. There are mathematical evidences for the multiverse and they ought not be dismissed. This mentality can be summed up to: dismissal of deductive reasoning in favor of inductive reasoning. Mathematical equations are deductive, experiments are inductive. This fallacious way of thinking is very recurrent in the mentality of so called skeptics.
I even suspect that their approach to understanding mathematics is inductive as well, more like: ''We learned that these equations were true, and we know they are true because they always worked'' instead of understanding why equations are inherently deductively valid or invalid.
14 |
So good to hear intelligent conversations on the subject!
6 |
Its hilarious Pigliucci goes on about convincing the proper communities, its disturning how science doesnt see just like organised religion they gave authority to themselfs; and expect other to fall in line.
5 |
If materialists could harness esp they would cause serious mischief. That is why the spirits which lend us this power take it away in their vicinity.
11 |
The multiverse is a poor interpretation of the measurement problem.
5 |
4:19 Massimo Pigliucci confirms very well what I have criticised of the neo-atheist movement. Is that they don't teach critical thinking to their followers, but pre-established thoughts that are deemed logical and sound and ''scientific'' that the followers then take for granted. Which results in a very sophisticated (in the sense of sophistry) bandwagon that claims to pursue the higher aspirations of science while doing the opposite, aka following an antagonistic or anti-science bandwagon, similar to what they criticise of religion.
''They (atheists) rely on what scientists do to inform themselves'' this is a huge admission. It means that they rely on other people to think for them, that they are not philosophically and intellectually developed to think for themselves.
5 |
FANTASTIC! Thank you!
1 |
Right or wrong. I like rupert!
4 |
So well spoken Mr Sheldrake. Telepathy is a part of many people's lives, or at least the perception of it. A person doesn't require imperical evidence of their own senses and experiences.
I appreciate your research greatly.
6 |
People will show up to hear Rupert speak....who the f*** is that other guy ?
6 |
the ending is so good
|
Well edited.
1 |
@Mulberry2000
2 years ago
Rupert really handled himself really well here.
13 |