Modern physics midgets imagine themselves wiser than the giants of the past

Great physicist Max Planck had quite immaterial views on the nature of the universe. I guess the present materialist consensus-clinging cohort of physicists automatically dismiss Plank's views, midgets imagining themselves to be above the stature of giants like Planck, in the metaphysics department. 

"All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force that brings the parts of the atom in vibration, and keeps the smallest solar system of the universe together. As there in the entire universe does not exist an intelligent force, nor an eternal force- man has not yet succeeded in inventing the perpetuum mobile- so must we assume behind this force the existence of a conscious intelligent spirit. This spirit is the basis of all matter. The visible but impermanent matter is not the reality and truth- because without spirit, matter wouldn’t exist at all- but the invisible, immortal spirit is the truth. Because every spirit belongs to a being, we are forced to assume it to be a spiritual being. Because spiritual beings do not come about by themselves, but must be created, I will not hesitate in fact, to call this secretive creator, like people of all cultures through millennia has done, God. Thereby moves the physicist who dealt with matter, from the realm of stuff to the realm of the spirit. And so is our task ended, and we must then pass on the research into the hands of the philosophers."


This is from a lecture, ‘Das Wesen der Materie’ (The Essence/Nature/Character of Matter), given in Florence, Italy (1944). Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, Nr. 1797. Excerpt in Gregg Braden, The Spontaneous Healing of Belief: Shattering the Paradigm of False Limits (2009), 334-35.

More anti-physicalist foot stomping!   Is there nothing positive to discuss anymore?  Could we not at least discuss such things in a questioning way instead of turning everything into a self-righteous tantrum?  I don't know how much longer I'll be coming to PQ.  It doesn't feel good these days.

More anti-physicalist foot stomping!   Is there nothing positive to discuss anymore?  Could we not at least discuss such things in a questioning way instead of turning everything into a self-righteous tantrum?  I don't know how much longer I'll be coming to PQ.  It doesn't feel good these days.

There's a whole thread on the Intelligence Behind Evolution?

Not to mention open threads on the spiritual value of light, the member experiment section, etc?

Seems unfair to critici[ze] Nbtruthman for a bit of flare, given the recent pseudoskeptic threads with sensationalist titles?

More anti-physicalist foot stomping!   Is there nothing positive to discuss anymore?  Could we not at least discuss such things in a questioning way instead of turning everything into a self-righteous tantrum?  I don't know how much longer I'll be coming to PQ.  It doesn't feel good these days.

Physicalist foot-stomping, haranguing and proselytizing are endemic in our society, where the great majority of the educated elite are atheist materialists. Accordingly, the periodic challenging of this brainwashing is very well justified on the part of the small minority who believe or at least strongly suspect physicalism is false and spirit is real. Methinks I (or maybe Max Planck) must have stepped on a sensitive materialist toe.

Physicalist foot-stomping, haranguing and proselytizing are endemic in our society, where the great majority of the educated elite are atheist materialists. Accordingly, the periodic challenging of this brainwashing is very well justified on the part of the small minority who believe or at least strongly suspect physicalism is false and spirit is real. Methinks I (or maybe Max Planck) must have stepped on a sensitive materialist toe.

Doubtful, Brian is a Christian and has liked quite a few of your posts about ID?

There's good reason to be suspicious about certain "proponents" right now, but I'd bet a good deal on Brian being genuine.

I can understand Brian's point, kind of. I do feel like it's probably unfair to the scientific establishment overall to lump them in with a certain group. There may be lots of different opinions throughout, they just think materialism is successful and useful so do not rock the boat. Though I will say that some science popularizers have some huge egos however.

Maybe I was a bit unfair but right now, even the word "pseudoskeptic" is an indigestible cliche to me.  There just seems to be too much jumping on people for what is probably just their genuine beliefs.  Maybe I'm just bored of the same old stuff being regurgitated over and over and over again and getting us nowhere.

Maybe I was a bit unfair but right now, even the word "pseudoskeptic" is an indigestible cliche to me.  There just seems to be too much jumping on people for what is probably just their genuine beliefs.  Maybe I'm just bored of the same old stuff being regurgitated over and over and over again and getting us nowhere.

I can feel this too in regards to the psuedoskeptic thing. If we're gonna respond to stuff we need to properly engage with it, not just throw out labels and attacks. This is what I try to do a little at least, give things a bit more of an in depth look, not just rest on our laurels. And with the same old stuff just kind of a slow grind really, we have to wait for progress but who knew progress in science is sloooooow so all we've got is the stuff we've got.

Maybe I was a bit unfair but right now, even the word "pseudoskeptic" is an indigestible cliche to me.  There just seems to be too much jumping on people for what is probably just their genuine beliefs.  Maybe I'm just bored of the same old stuff being regurgitated over and over and over again and getting us nowhere.

"Pseudoskeptic" just makes reference to the fact these people are using "skeptic" incorrectly as they are really just believers in Physicalism or at least atheism.

A turn on the phrase "pseudo-science".

But as for getting somewhere, it's a slow process partly because there is great difficulty in putting the pieces together. It's not even clear there can be a real path in that regard, at least until we get the meeting of parapsychology and the rest of science. Probably a few years more for that process to begin.

"Pseudoskeptic" just makes reference to the fact these people are using "skeptic" incorrectly as they are really just believers in Physicalism or at least atheism.

A turn on the phrase "pseudo-science".

But as for getting somewhere, it's a slow process partly because there is great difficulty in putting the pieces together. It's not even clear there can be a real path in that regard, at least until we get the meeting of parapsychology and the rest of science. Probably a few years more for that process to begin.

This would be greatly to be desired, but it may be impossible at least as science is defined now and has been for many years. Science is supposed to be experimentally based, with the absolute requirement for hypothesis forming, predictions made from the hypothesis, experimentation or observation confirming or disconfirming the hypothesis, and finally theory forming if the experimental or observational verification succeeded. 

The paranormal is notoriously (almost deliberately) elusive of experimental verification - in general most paranormal phenomena can't be experimentally duplicated at will, occurring rarely, capriciously and spontaneously in everyday life as with rare traumatic events leading to NDEs. Reincarnation memories can't be experimentally induced other than the questionable evocation of such apparent memories during regression hypnosis. With most of these phenomena the core of the evidence consists of human accounts of experiences, not  instrumental recordings. Many of these rare occurrences are independently investigated and confirmed, so they can be classed as veridical empirical evidence, but orthodox science generally claims the occurrences are anecdotal and therefore worthless. 

PSI can be attempted to be duplicated in laboratory setups, but the effects though shown to be real are usually only shown to be so at very low P value margins over chance. Very rarely is this rule exceeded. Large and dramatic values over chance can only be produced by combining large numbers of experimental series in single analyses. Whereas dramatic PSI does happen, but this is very rarely and not in the lab environment. 

So it seems to me that the "powers that be" have dictated that the nature of our physical world and physical life in body does not except in rare and unusual circumstances permit manifestation of dramatic PSI or psychical phenomena, the kind of repeatable manifestations that can be investigated by science. This unfortunate fact of life would seem to prevent parapsychology from ever becoming a full-fledged "science". I wish things were otherwise, but this seems to be the case.

This leaves the situation where the accumulating weight of massive amounts of empirical evidence mostly consisting of paranormal phenomena like veridical NDEs, mediumistic communications and reincarnation memories may eventually overcome the cultural stagnation in physicalism, but it is a very slow process. Science based on the physicalism paradigm has been very very successful in advancing knowledge of the physical world and bettering the lives of humans, and it doesn't look like science is going to be transformed somehow to accommodate PSI and the paranormal. Hopefully, people may just come to accept the reality of both despite their seeming contradiction.