Thread: An Empirical View of Science Dogma

Rupert Sheldrake made a TED talk I'd like to share here based off a book, The Science of Delusion. He's a researcher of consciousness from Cambridge and has revealed some profound possibilities. However, in this particular talk, he tackles scientific presumptions such as fixed universal laws and materialism. I invite you to defend your beliefs about Science as he tears them apart using science.



I believe the core of the problem here is whenever people use pseudoscience to argue preconceptions unrelated to scientific evidence, critics falsify their claims such that the universe is conscious and in doing so fall deeper entrenched in the opposite claim. The claims raised in the video as scientific dogma are not validated, they are simply fallen back upon after anything else is properly falsified. The video does not attempt to argue much pseudoscience, it simply falsifies some of these base agreements held in early science which have not yet been discarded or questioned much at all by the majority of the scientific community. I believe they aren't questioned due to an unrecognized fear of uncertainty.

"Well if not this, then what?" is the hidden question people are afraid of asking. After all faith in the afterlife and benevolent master consciousness fall apart, materialism provides relative sanctuary because at least people can be confident of it. Then Occam's Razor is fallaciously thrown in at some point even though none of the dogma is any simpler nor helps the universe make an inch more sense. And that fact that we live in a profoundly confusing universe terrifies people into vilifying all that questions their dogma, much like any religious zealot refusing to question their faith for fear of being forced to ask what truly is, if not that. Just my guess, though, based on personal experience.