The point still stands: Why should we believe in something that is not supported by a shred of evidence? What is the value in accepting something when we have no reason whatsoever to believe that it is true, other than the fact that we really, really want it to be true?
Hey tacit!
Good questions. Problem is (and has been all along): i never claimed to know any of those answers (or cared one way or the other in "providing" them, if i did).
Originally Posted By: tacit
Seers and prophets and gurus and preachers say all sorts of things, some of which are inherently contradictory and some of which are extraordinary indeed. Why should we believe any of it? What is it that makes us, as a species, so willing to accept things without the slightest hint of any sort of proof that they might have any truth at all?
Good questions. Problem is (and has been all along): i never claimed to know any of those answers (or cared one way or the other in "providing" them, if i did).
Originally Posted By: tacit
History certainly shows us that whenever some religious faith disagrees with science on some matter of empirical fact, the religion is wrong and the science is right. Why, since faith can't get provable things right, should anyone believe that it gets unprovable things right?
Good questions. [why the hell do you keep asking me this stuff? Â ] Believe what you want... whatever pleases you. [sound familiar yet?]
Originally Posted By: tacit
Fritjof Capra isn't a layperson; he's a fraud. The target audience for his book is laypeople.
To quote physicist Dr. Heinz R. Pagels, author of The Cosmic Code: Quantum Physics as the Language of Nature: "No qualified physicist that I know would claim to find such a connection [between Hindu mysticism and physics] without knowingly committing fraud. The claim that the fields of modern physics have anything to do with the "field of consciousness" is false. The notion that what physicists call "the vacuum state" has anything to do with consciousness is nonsense. The claim that large numbers of people meditating helps reduce crime and war by creating a unified field of consciousness is foolishness of a high order. The presentation of the ideas of modern physics side by side, and apparently supportive of, the ideas of the Maharishi about pure consciousness can only be intended to deceive those who might not know any better."
Whoa. Several problems there. First, you are quoting what Pagels said in response to what *two* different people said (Capra and the Maharishi). By blending those two, the sample is polluted. Second, we'd also need to see the *exact* quote from Capra's book.. just in case it may have been misinterpreted/misunderstood somehow. [i.e., Pagels words in your quote: "such a connection" -- which connection? did he disagree with every word in the book... or only 5 particular sentences? was there anything (not mentioned by Pagels) that he felt was worthwhile... or did he (like you) simply skip over any [interesting or unusual] points of agreement?]
You like science right? Then present a more convincing case of your allegation (fraud). If you're a big fan of Randi, then don't settle for these murky references. What exactly did Capra say?... what did you understand it to mean?... and what proof can you show us that it's "fraudulent"?
BTW, apparently Pagels sold books too [e.g., "The Cosmic Code" ]. And -- in true karmic nature -- someone found a way to dissect it and discover 'a load of erroneous presuppositions'. And on, and on, and yawn. Perhaps Pagels was blending the Maharishi's words with Capra's in order to hype his own product... who knows?
I gotta side with dkmarsh here: i really *don't* have a dog in this race. I mentioned Capra because i enjoyed reading his thoughts 30 years ago. If you want to tear him up, go for it. [but i haven't seen anything conclusive or scientific as yet.] So far you've said Paul Davies "doesn't know what science is", and Fritjof Capra "is a fraud". [and you were none too kind to Einstein either.] I would pay some serious money to be in the same room, if you guys ever got together.
 ]
