At TEDxWhitechapel on January 13, 2013, Rupert Sheldrake gave a provocative talk in which he suggests that modern science is based on ten dogmas, and makes the case that none of them hold up to scrutiny. According to him, these dogmas — including, for example, that nature is mechanical and purposeless, that the laws and constants of nature are fixed, and that psychic phenomena like telepathy are impossible — have held back the pursuit of knowledge.
TED’s scientific advisors have questioned whether his list is a fair description of scientific assumptions — indeed, several of the dogmas are actually active areas of science inquiry (including whether physical ‘constants’ are really unchanging) — and believe there is little evidence for some of Sheldrake’s more radical claims, such as his theory of morphic resonance, and claim that the speed of light has been changing. They recommended that the talk be should not be distributed without being framed with caution. Accordingly, we have reposted his talk here, with the above cautionary introduction. We invite scientists, skeptics, knowledge-seekers and supporters — and Sheldrake himself, if he’s willing — to join in a conversation over this talk.
Is this an idea worth spreading, or misinformation? Does Sheldrake accurately describe scientists’ beliefs and are his theories credible? What’s the evidence for either position?
There’s only one rule for the conversation. Comments need to be phrased in respectful terms. Those that are intemperate or unnecessarily insulting will be removed.
Join the conversation here, where it’s possible to upvote comments, sort by recency or rating, and see all comments in one page. We look forward to the discussion.
Pingback: Mind-body war and peace | harmony meditation, harmony2world, spiritual guidance, meditation Westfield NJ, yoga Cranford NJ, yoga Cranford new jersey, yoga Westfield NJ, yoga Westfield new jersey
Pingback: Pick of the Week (past/present/future) | Leigh Wright
Pingback: Graham Hancock – The War on Consciousness @ TEDxWhitechapel | 2012: What's the 'real' truth?
Pingback: But what is real? “Science vs. Pseudoscience” | Exopermaculture
Pingback: TED's backflip on Sheldrake’s The Science Delusion - Broken Box Radio
Pingback: Metaphors, Assumptions and Dogma in Science (Response to The Science Delusion by Rupert Sheldrake) | Sex, math and programming
Pingback: The Way Out of the TED Mess, #1: The Problem | Conscious Life News
Pingback: Rupert Sheldrake - The Science Delusion BANNED TED
Pingback: War on Consciousness, TED, Ideas Worth Suppressing, Graham Hancock, Rupert Sheldrake, censorship, TEDx – Conscious Frontiers
Pingback: War on Consciousness? | Life Arts Media
Pingback: Rubber Zoo Designs Risque Latex Couture, Styling Men and Women's Latex Fashion since 1996
Pingback: Graham Hancock and Rupert Sheldrake ~ Shaking TEDx To The Core | Rubber Zoo Designs Risque Latex Couture, Styling Men and Women's Latex Fashion since 1996
Pingback: The Science Delusion: Freeing the Spirit of Enquiry : Explore Holistic Medicine
Pingback: TED Backs Down: People Power Wins Against Censorship | Orwellwasright's Weblog
Pingback: TED Do Over In Progress: Two New Discussions Open Up | The Weiler Psi
Pingback: TED Backs Down: People Power Wins Against Censorship | Disinformation
Joe Anderson commented on Mar 19 2013
I don’t think we can have a legitimate discussion about how to move forward without first being aware of how we got to this point. If you haven’t seen Rupert Sheldrake’s response to the initial charges leveled against his talk by TED I urge you to please go read it now. His response can be found here:
http://blog.ted.com/2013/03/14/open-for-discussion-graham-hancock-and-rupert-sheldrake/
After reading it I think any fair minded individual will conclude that TED’s treatment of Sheldrake up until this point has been nothing short of outrageous. They grossly misrepresented his talk, they concocted a number of baseless charges, and casually referred to him as a “pseudoscientist”. When you call a scientist a pseudoscientist you’re telling the public the person is a crackpot- that’s what the average person thinks of when they hear the word, a crazy person. It was an attempt by TED to marginalize Sheldrake, to let the community know his seat is not even at the back of the science bus, he shouldn’t be allowed on it to begin with. Perhaps most depressingly, even though Sheldrake has clearly shown the anonymous accusations made against him were false, TED still seems unwilling to give up the witch hunt. They bizarrely mention here http://blog.ted.com/2013/03/18/graham-hancock-and-rupert-sheldrake-a-fresh-take/ that Sheldrake’s talk should have a “clear health warning”- now I think reasonable people will all agree that watching Sheldrake’s talk is hardly going to result in the viewer getting lung cancer. Seriously, what exactly is the justification for this desperately needed “health warning”? Sheldrake has already shown their accusations against his talk to be without merit. Again, go read his response to their charges if you haven’t already done so.
TED claims they relied on two things to remove the talks, one of which was the advice of an anonymous Board of Scientific Advisers. TED says the board did their due diligence- if this is true how do they account for the fact Sheldrake convincingly demolished every single one of the accusations they so confidently made against him? The first thing I would do is get some new people on that board; someone like Dean Radin would be a good start. Because really, this small minded board has done TED no favors up until this point. In fact, they’ve done a lot of damage and cost you a ton of goodwill.
Ted also says they depend on a set of what I consider to be far too rigid guidelines. Simply put, these guidelines are not compatible with TED’s stated goal of adopting a “broad interpretation” of the phrase “ideas worth spreading”. Similarly, the guidelines seem to contradict the understanding TED says they have that sometimes “scientific assumptions get turned upside down”. Frankly, the guidelines as they currently exist give the impression that anything that’s not mainstream should be considered anathema. Set aside your pride and do the right thing and apologize and restore the videos. I want to go back to being a TED fan, but the longer you drag this out the less likely that is to happen.