(2019-08-13, 07:05 PM)Chris Wrote: [ -> ]I think that only displaces the argument to the question of who is reasonable. But still ...
Perusing YouTube one can find a number of individuals that disagree with firmly established things. I've seen people insist the Earth is flat or state there is no Moon. Reasonable people do not contest such things. With that said, your response has a philosophical ring to it which means I cannot offer you more other than it's not a reasonable outlook.
(2019-08-13, 09:28 PM)Steve001 Wrote: [ -> ]Perusing YouTube one can find a number of individuals that disagree with firmly established things. I've seen people insist the Earth is flat or state there is no Moon. Reasonable people do not contest such things. With that said, your response has a philosophical ring to it which means I cannot offer you more other than it's not a reasonable outlook.
Your philosophical ring certainly seems very circular!
Anyhow, to try to get back on topic, perhaps it would be interesting to hear Rupert Sheldrake's thoughts on what the obstacles are to mainstream scientists taking parapsychology seriously, and how they might be overcome.
So that's a question about his ontology of mind and a question about obstacles facing parapsychology in the mainstream. Steve - if either of your questions was seriously intended, clarify that and I'll include one of them.
You might ask his views on Darwinian evolution, intelligent design and how his model of morphic resonance (or what ever) could account for the sudden arrival of so many diverse species with different body plans as discussed by Stephen Meyer in Darwin's doubt.
Or perhaps, what is the creative source and where did the “memory” come from that would account for the sudden arrival of so many diverse species with different body plans in the Cambrian explosion.
(2019-08-14, 12:30 AM)Will Wrote: [ -> ]So that's a question about his ontology of mind and a question about obstacles facing parapsychology in the mainstream. Steve - if either of your questions was seriously intended, clarify that and I'll include one of them.
My suggestion was seriously intended whether Steve's were or not, and I would probably have asked something like that in any case. Only if it's helpful, and if you don't get oversubscribed.
I would be curious to know if he's ever had to seriously refine or even scrap a previous idea that he'd published regarding psi-related phenomena based on new evidence, recognizing an error or the presence of bias, or his thinking having evolved.
Thanks!
Counting the one question I had, there are still five slots open - four, if Steve will confirm one of his.
Thanks for arranging this! My question is ->
"What are the most profound paranormal/religious experiences you have personally had in your life?"
And we seem to have multiple questions of the "Where's the beef Rupert?" variety that can be consolidated.
I don't know whether this angle is encompassed in any of the earlier suggestions:
How has the reception of your ideas changed over the years, and do you see shifting attitudes either from society as a whole, and particularly from the scientific establishment?