Exposing Scientific Dogmas - Banned TED Talk - Rupert Sheldrake

Rupert Sheldrake, PhD, is a biologist and author best known for his hypothesis of morphic resonance. At Cambridge University he worked in developmental biology as a Fellow of Clare College. He was Principal Plant Physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics in Hyderabad, India. From 2005 to 2010 he was Director of the Perrott-Warrick project for research on unexplained human and animal abilities, administered by Trinity College, Cambridge. Sheldrake has published a number of books - A New Science of Life (1981), The Presence of the Past (1988), The Rebirth of Nature (1991), Seven Experiments That Could Change the World (1994), Dogs That Know When Their Owners are Coming Home (1999), The Sense of Being Stared At (2003), The Science Delusion (Science Set Free) (2012), Science and Spiritual Practices (2017), Ways of Going Beyond and Why They Work (2019).

Rupert gave a talk entitled The Science Delusion at TEDx Whitechapel, Jan 12, 2013. The theme for the night was Visions for Transition: Challenging existing paradigms and redefining values (for a more beautiful world). In response to protests from two materialists in the US, the talk was taken out of circulation by TED, relegated to a corner of their website and stamped with a warning label.

Subscribe to After Skool for more insightful videos.

[coyote]

The phrase "It's science." Has become its own iron clad explanation. This is ironically used to stop people from questioning things. The antithesis of science.

[SofoArchon]

Remember: Science as a method and science as an institution are two very different things. At some point, I'm going to make a video on this very topic, explaining in detail why that is so.

[CoenBijpost]

That a Ted Talk questioning scientific dogma is itself banned is a great indicator of the existence of scientific dogma

[clarkside]

Science is not our deity, it is our collective knowledge of tangible things that we can presently perceive. It is an excellent tool for our prosperity, when accurate, but it is only ever a tool.

[jamiel]

Whether or not I agree with his personal theories, I absolutely appreciate the ability to listen and consider new perspectives

[wallyfox]

There should never be a thing called a “banned Ted Talk.”

[DomDomPop]

The use of science as a weapon to prevent inquiry has always struck me as the most back-asswards bastardization of a system for the sake of securing both funds and egos that I’ve ever seen.

[Mary-J-OK]

Both of my parents were research scientists their whole careers, and I worked in molecular biotechnology for 4 years. I saw first hand that the only research that gets funded is whatever works in terms of profit. Unless it's part of that model, it won't get funding. And some of the most dogmatic people I have met are scientists. They won't accept anything being questioned, yet think they're so different from a staunchly religious person. That approach is holding us back, but it can't hold us back forever because it is the nature of the conscious universe to evolve.

[PC.NickRowan]

In my experience in college and having to work in departments that call themselves a science, I have personally experienced that academics are some of the most closed minded and dogmatic individuals who are so disconnected from the world and other people within it, and are so certain that they know the answer to everything, despite the scientific method being a philosophical method of enquiry, discovery, but not certainty

[jcole]

EVERY time someone says you can’t question something, they’re probably trying to protect their own power and not let you threaten it.

[TheAnarchitek]

Dogmatic thinking is the problem, whether science or religion. Humans want definite answers to speculative questions, without having to think, or do any of the hard work necessary to make thinking productive.

[nagillim]

As a STEM graduate, one of the first things i was taught was to never take a fact at face value without first looking at the evidence and the methods by which it was gathered.

Sadly many scientists prefer not to do that.

[liberty-matrix]

"The problem with science is science follows the money." ~Russell Brand

[kimberlymoore]

I'm not on board with his hypotheses, but he is asking the right questions. That's the whole point of science: question everything.

[clutchmatic]

I dont entirely agree with him but he raises an excellent point as a scientist... relying on laws is a shortcut and laws are merely observed as they describe the world and are unable to define it. Every analysis should acknowledge the reliance on such dogma and then address the extent that dogmas may affect conclusions

[Flyingdutchy]

I recognize some dogmas here at my own university. The ironic thing is that our professors teach students not to take assumptions. However, when challenged on certain matters, their reasoning typically hinges entirely on assumptions.

[sorlowski]

"The thing that doesn't fit is the thing that's the most interesting: the part that doesn't go according to what you expected." R. P. Feynman

[FlashmanVC]

“crossed into the realm of pseudoscience”

The fact that they take his wholly valid, intellectual criticism of their worldview and label it “pseudoscience” despite science not actually being the basis for what he’s talking about essentially proves him right.
You don’t agree with us, you’re guilty of pseudoscience, because everything we believe is science

[danielalba]

I was expecting him to talk about the inconsistencies of modern scientific theories (which real scientists are aware of and are trying to answer) but he immediately starts talking about consciousness, psychic powers and alternative medicine. Disappointing.

[jjbudinski]

The speed of light being a constant has to do with relativity. No matter what speed and direction one is going you will measure C to be the same thing. The idea that people using people-made equipment and techniques to try to measure something precisely, and that measurement changing over time, is very common in science. The measured mass of the proton has also been updated recently. Its common knowledge that C varies depending on the medium- C as we try to measure it is in a vacuum, and in reality a vacuum still has a lot going on so even this measurement has some wiggle room (its quantum mechanics, in the end there is always wiggle room. And yes, physicists know this but it is easier to use the best average which has worked well enough to give us things like smart phones and GPS).
On the subject of the meter: a meter is an arbitrary unit of measurement, a human made concept. C is used because it is easily and consistently measured, as opposed to trying to machine a material to a length or some other method. If we find that we measure C more accurately our standard of the meter length will change- if the new measurement of C blows up the meter we can revert to a different standard. Weights and measures are arbitrary human constructs.
As mentioned elsewhere, we are in the gravity well of other bodies of the solar system as well as the simple fact that our understanding of gravity is that it is caused by mass. The reality is the more accurately we can measure it the more other factors will affect our measurements. The planets have enough gravitational influence to move the Sun around!
Lastly, the Big Bang doesn't state something came from nothing, it states that at a certain point we can't see any further back in history. Who knows, we may discover that with newer more powerful telescopes that our current observations don't tell the whole story and Big Bang will get scrapped.