Since the New Age way of thinking is more attractive to many than the scientific way of thinking, its potential to sway people is greater. The media and the entertainment industry feed off of this and increase the spread of mysticism and its more harmful form - pseudo-science, in order to rake in profits
Summary
Under the guise of complementary (and perhaps even mutually reinforcing) fields, the New Age and science are at odds at the deepest levels. At the level of the phenomena, the concepts that the New Age people talk about do not receive empirical validity. At a deeper level, the disagreement between the approaches is about the essence of truth and the way in which it can be reached. One can see the New Age as a form of anti-science.
Since the New Age way of thinking is more attractive to many than the scientific way of thinking, its potential to sway people is greater. The media and the entertainment industry feed off of this and increase the spread of mysticism and its more harmful form - thepseudo-science, in order to rake in profits.
A situation in which an anti-scientific way of thinking is widespread and accepted and the boundaries between it and scientific thinking are becoming more and more blurred is a dangerous situation for the continuity of science and even for society as a whole.
To reduce these dangers you have to act, and the only effective way that I see before my eyes is Education for sharp thinking from a young age, for the entire population. Learning scientific content is not enough. Investigative, curious and skeptical thinking - sharp thinking - is the "secret ingredient" that will protect the future generation from the spread of the epidemic of illusions.
Clarification of concepts, before we continue
It is possible to identify two directions in which intellectual people strive. One direction is the attempt to get closer to the objective truth, to knowledge, to the knowledge of external reality. The scientific tools are suitable for the pursuit of this goal.
The other direction is experience Find personal meaning, improve the feeling, increase self-confidence, the sense of control, purpose, inner strength, etc. This is the subjective-spiritual direction. The spiritual tools are suitable for the pursuit of this goal.
Both goals are worthy goals in my view, and I respect one or another "spiritual" activity that improves the consciousness of the person engaged in it just as I value one or another "scientific" activity that advances our knowledge and understanding of the external world in which we live.
At the same time, any confusion between the tools and the goals leads to embarrassing results: the spiritual tools are not suitable to learn about the external objective reality, just as the scientific tools are not suitable to give personal meanings and a good feeling. Moreover, mixing these orthogonal worlds also leads to endless idle arguments.
As long as it is an activity aimed at improving a person's sense of self or changing their way of looking at the world (ie - inner experiences), even a tarot card opening ceremony or a visit to a smart numerologist can do the job.
But the rules of the game change as soon as a claim is made regarding the "correctness" or "truth" of the beliefs or concepts in question.
So we move from the inner subjective psychological world, to the outer objective physical world.
In general I seenew age And in its dangerous version - the pseudo-sciences - A botched hybridization attempt between these two orthogonal worlds, without the use of appropriate tools, neither spiritual nor scientific. This is an attempt to dance on both weddings: to deduce from experiences inner meaning on external objective truths. At best this leads to believing in illusions. In the worst case, to charlatanism and a real danger to society.
This is where I would like to expand on.
What is New Age actually?
The New Age can be defined as "a post-modern religion, consumerist in its approach, running away from politics and treating spiritual ideas as a supermarket, capitalism as a friend, and the mainstream of Israeli society as a river that must be integrated into and navigated"
(From an article in Haaretz in which Vared Lee interviews Dr. Dalit Simchai - a graduate of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at the University of Haifa, who researched the issue).
Dalit: "In the new era, there is no leadership that makes decisions, there is no hierarchy, but a kind of network. No one decided what to call 'us'. The conceptual core of the New Age sees positively the seemingly impossible kibbutz between opposite things. In the New Age there are arguments, but the common perception is that everything is legitimate and everything goes. Each person creates his own spiritual path while choosing ideas and symbols from a wide variety of beliefs, of which he gives a personal interpretation."
core ideas
Below are the basic beliefs of the New Age (summary from a book that examines the subject).
• There is no such thing as objective truth/reality. We create our truth/reality.
• If an experience feels real, it is real. If an idea feels right to you, it is right.
• It doesn't matter if beliefs are true or not, as long as they are meaningful to you.
• There are mystical, spiritual or internal ways of knowing that are different and superior to the usual forms of knowing.
• Science itself is just another belief or belief system or myth, no more true or justified than other beliefs.
The ritual layer
There are hundreds of different rituals, techniques and rituals that were invented throughout history and are currently being used by New Age people. For the purpose of the discussion, I also include diagnostic methods and energy therapy in medical contexts. Often one person engages in several methods at the same time, such as healing + healing + crystals + numerology. Each according to the inclinations of his heart, as mentioned - a spiritual supermarket.
Some of these methods have never been scientifically studied (the users of the method obviously believe in its effectiveness and do not look for "proof", while the scientists believe in its ineffectiveness and therefore choose not to waste their time testing it).
The methods that were studied were found to lack a grip on reality.
The user's impression of the effectiveness can be explained as a combination of a certain interpretation of the events on the part of the user and the placebo effect. In any case, no connection was found between the set of symbols and the specific rituals performed and the achieved effect (for example between the constellation of stars at the moment of birth / date of birth / name / the shape of the lines in the person's palm and any details in his life).
I will not enter into a serious discussion on the subject of the various cults, both because of the vast scope of the subject, and because this would divert the focus from the main ideas I am trying to convey in this article.
What is the scope of the traffic?
I was not able to locate a source that estimates the number of "members of the movement" in Israel. Dalit says: "It is true that the New Age arrived here ten years late (relative to its flowering in the 70s-80s in the West), but it grew very quickly. At first the field was perceived as illegitimate and strange. In the 90's the first festivals were organized. Ten years have not passed and the first festivals are already out and there are other, mass festivals in their place. The infiltration of complementary medicine into hospitals, the practice of yoga in schools, talks about energies in every second advertisement - the world of concepts of the new era permeated quickly."
Surveys conducted in the USA a few years ago show the following picture. Undoubtedly, this is not a fringe phenomenon:
New Age thinking versus scientific thinking
The following table compares the two approaches, and reveals essential contrasts (of course, in some cases I have made a certain generalization or abstraction in order to refine the idea):
|
new age |
science |
|
stories are desirable (happiness, health and wealth, forever and quickly). |
stories Not wanted (Purposeless evolution, material world). |
|
Messages intuitive וEasy for perception |
Messages not intuitive וDifficult for studying |
|
emotion, intuitions, heart. |
שכל, logic, analytical analysis. |
|
Personal contact, words. |
Instruments, numbers. |
|
Domains Personal (happiness, success, relationship, health). |
areas thatare not personal. |
|
exists subjective reality And we are the ones whoCreate her. |
exists objective reality And we are the ones whoDiscover her. |
|
The personal experience as the supreme truth. |
empirical evidence and statistical analyzes as the ultimate truth. |
|
Everything is possible. |
Only very certain things are possible - These are the laws of nature that science is looking for, that distinguish between the possible and the impossible. |
|
thinking a magician (The effects of the inner world on the outer world and vice versa, not within the known laws of nature). |
thinking Rational. |
|
Matching the facts to the belief |
Adapting the theory to the facts |
|
decisiveness (Certain and indisputable truth. It feels right to me means it's right). |
skepticism (It is always possible that we will have to change our opinion in light of new findings). |
|
Vague concepts and full of contradictions On a philosophical and practical level (which is fine - to each his own angle on the truth). |
Well-defined and consistent concepts. Disturbing inconsistencies, require settlement and sometimes even a revolution. |
|
Invention concepts that are not essential (but tempting) to explain reality. |
struggle forReducing the concepts that are required to describe reality. |
|
There is no predictability |
There is an ability to predict. |
Looking at the table, it is easy to see that when it comes to popularity, there is a clear a priori priority for the New Age movement. "It's easy, it's tempting, I'm always right, no one will confuse me with the facts - they're just an illusion, and after all I'm an inseparable part of God. My thoughts create reality."
It's a little ironic that in the end, the ability to predict/predict the New Age approach is zero (the ability to predict has never been proven in these areas, except of course retrospective interpretation), while the ability to predict/predict the scientific approach is truly infinite. Every electronic device we use proves this billions of times per second, in each of the tens of millions of electronic components that are in it and work according to the laws of quantum mechanics, Maxwell's equations, etc.
How do you know things? – The approaches in frontal collision
To truly understand science does not mean remembering formulas by rote or knowing how to solve problems in mechanics. It means first of all knowing how to define the research question in a clear and precise way, to understand how experiments are planned, how to perform them correctly, how to estimate the measurement errors, how to neutralize various biases, how to analyze the results correctly, how to consider different explanations for the facts and many other tools, with the goal is to reach reliable conclusions about the world in which we live.
From several discussions I had with New Agers, I gradually realized how widespread the misunderstanding is about the nature of science. The impression arises that the common approach in the public treats science as a collection of details of knowledge, while the real uniqueness of science is the way it takes to reach knowledge. The real debate is not whether ghosts exist, or whether numerology/homeopathy works, but what is the way to know if ghosts actually exist, or whether numerology/homeopathy works.
The guiding principle of the New Age: Anything that does not resonate with my inner truth - to the trash, And what suits me and feels right to me - I will take.
The guiding principle of science: An idea that does not resonate with the results of the experiment - to the trash, and an idea that suits them - I will try to refute in another way.
I tried to allude in the past to the limitations of personal experience as a basis for reliable knowledge, when I reviewed the subject of hallucinations. In addition, the many cases in which different people hold conflicting "inner truths" about something concrete (such as different predictions for the future, different medical diagnoses about the same person, seeing different colors of halos about the same patient, completely different astrological analyzes based on the same data, etc.) raise a big question mark about the validity of any of these inner truths.
Here are things she said to me dealing with the field in one of the discussions that developed on my blog. I don't think the contrast between this approach and the scientific approach can be sharpened any further:
"I currently receive new knowledge from internal sources as much as from external sources. I believe in these sources as more valid than I believe in any person/research/something external to me... I don't see research as something necessary for me or particularly valid for me, but for confirmation for the mind/skeptic who is only a part of me... mainly as a means of implementing ideas that require the cooperation of Many people - in order to mobilize the collective consciousness to recognize something... all the concepts that were invented and also accepted by science were first invented and then became "accepted/true" and the difference is that you believe that first there is an external reality and we are the ones who investigate it.
My way is not the way to reach the truth. I already know really. My way is to express it, to express myself... My way is perhaps also to lead people on the shortest possible path to the truth for them and to try and remember the truth myself at any given moment (because the illusion of reality draws into it)".
If a person thinks he has already found the truth, if any other evidence he receives from the outside, no matter how reasoned, will not affect his opinion (but only if it supports it), if he treats the thinking and skeptical mind as something that needs to be calmed down and desired so that it stops interfering with holding the desired beliefs, And if he sees reality as only an illusion - what room is left for investigation? To search for the truth? not left A reexamination of the New Age principles that appeared at the beginning of the article shows that it is not a particularly extreme opinion, but the mainstream.
In terms of the way of thinking, the New Age is the opposite of science. This is "anti-science".
"Knowledge" that came from internal sources and is imparted in courses to the public - Israel 2011
To illustrate the fantastic realms things are reaching, below are a selection of quotes from various course descriptions that are given these days around the country (I did not invent anything, I promise. My imagination is not that rich):
- "From an ancient mystical tradition comes a unique process that allows the combination of an energetic sequence, laying hands and significant points on the face. This unique combination awakens the wisdom that exists in our cells, reviving them above the burnt memories of stress, fatigue and the marks of time and encourages smooth and fresh skin that radiates vitality and youth."
- "Multidimensional DNA analysis is a channeling technique for purifying patterns of dysfunction at the DNA level and replacing them with divine qualities."
- "When light and energy are woven together, nothing is impossible. Healing occurs when light is brought into areas where there is pain, or when pain is brought to where the light is. Our DNA collects our internal communication code and acts accordingly.”
- "In the 13-session course, we will get to know the basics of modern paganism, create personal communication with the ancient goddesses and gods, and re-experience being part of the living universe around us."
- "In the course we will learn to do Angel Reiki, and to summon the presence of the angels using crystals and essential oils, to receive spiritual guidance, healing and empowerment, for ourselves and the people close to us. In addition, we will learn to put ourselves into an alternative state of consciousness (trance) and communicate with the highest beings of light, such as Seth, Orin and Karion, as well as with councils of beings, such as the White Brotherhood, the Council of the Nine, the Heralds of the Dawn and more."
- And another example, which perhaps exhausts the entire story (I replaced the names with foreign letters): the XXX healing method was communicated by Y, a psychotherapist, a healer and a vessel for divine energy. About four years ago, while giving a workshop in New York, Y spoke and suddenly fell silent for a while. So he told the 300 or so people who attended the workshop that the masters had just told him to share with them and the world a new healing method. In this method of healing, the Source/God does the work. During a healing session of XXX, the 7 bodies are compressed into 18 inches around the physical body. This enables energetic work on all 7 bodies at the same time, and a deep and significant healing process, which continues to operate during the 21 days that follow it. This is why Y defined this method as, almost certainly, the most complete healing method on the planet at this time. The method raises the energy vibration of the aura (human energy field) and the energy field surrounding every living thing. During the healing you will be able to visualize the mind, the consciousness, while divine life energy will flow to the area of your being that needs it most, for your healing, and the balance is restored until you reach health (emotional and physical). Due to the fact that we are all connected and inseparable, you may find that healing has an effect on family and friends, so that as you change, those around you change. The method is suitable for treating any energy imbalance (physical, emotional, mental or spiritual) and its manifestations in life. The XXX apprenticeship is actually a one-day workshop, which will allow you to become licensed therapists.
On the complex interrelationship between science and the New Age
Since both "science" and "New-Age" include a multitude of currents, subfields and styles and are absent of organized leadership or a rigid system of definitions, it is expected that we will encounter a wide spectrum of different and contradictory opinions. Here are some common misconceptions.
Science and the New Age as complementary and separate in terms of occupations.
Science deals with the material world, and the New Age with the non-material world. This division sounds ostensibly symmetrical, and also does not provoke an uprising, not on the surface at least, because it separates authorities in a clear way: you scientists will deal with understanding the world of matter, and we with understanding the world of spirit and "energies".
This approach is acceptable as long as no claims are made by the New Age people about the physical world, because then the separation must be broken.
Any claim regarding receiving information in "unnatural" ways about the world (channeling, prophecy, cards, constellations, numerological calculation), any medical diagnosis or healing in a way that is not "natural" (healing, homeopathy, crystals, magnets, etc. - the list is endless literally) and any effect of thought on reality (summoning events, witchcraft, removing the evil eye), all of these break the separation and oblige the New Age people to demonstrate that their claims are indeed true, before even trying to explain them.
Science and the New Age as two equally correct or justified belief systems.
This claim also has a very egalitarian and non-argumentative flavor, but it is extremely dangerous precisely because of its innocent and deceptive nature. There is no equivalence between the approaches, as we will elaborate on later.
Science as confirming New Age theories
At every possible opportunity, the New Agers cling to science to "prove" their baseless claims (precisely because their claims are baseless, because if they had a base they would join the ranks of science).
There are several common ways to do this:
- Taking scientific concepts out of context and providing far-reaching interpretations to support metaphysical ideas: "uncertainty principle" => nothing can be known for sure, "the theory of relativity" => everything is relative, "the measurement affects the result in the world of microscopic quantum systems" => consciousness creates the reality of everyday life.
- Presentation of first-rate dubious findings obtained in unfounded and embarrassing "studies", as if they were scientific proofs (see "Maharishi's effect regarding the effects of prayers on the number of crime cases" or "the effect of words written on notes on the form of ice crystal crystallization" - "studies" cited in the film "Blip" as if it were a scientific proof of the metaphysical claims made in the film).
- Quotes from scientists taken out of context, or that relate to their private views and are not related to scientific research itself (Einstein, for example, is very popular with New Age people).
- Claims about material "proofs" for concepts that are not material, despite the obvious absurdity of it. This includes photographs and recordings of ghosts, measuring the weight of the soul, photographs of energetic auras, etc.
But a nagging problem arises again and again: every time researchers check the claims of believers in a controlled manner, the result is the same: there is no support for the existence of the phenomenon. No one dealing with mysterious "energies" or claiming special abilities has been able to demonstrate their powers under controlled experimental conditions. The results obtained do not deviate from chance, or are explained by the placebo effect (for example in alternative medical treatments), that is, any other ritual/treatment achieves exactly the same results.
What do the people of the New Age do in the face of the unfortunate fact that their beliefs remain only beliefs and do not receive any research support?
One way is to strengthen faith, with arguments such as:
- "We don't need scientific confirmations. We just know it's true. It feels right to us. It really resonates with us from the inside.”
- "It is not possible to prove such things scientifically. Science is limited to the material world, and cannot explore spiritual realms."
- "Experimental results depend on the will of that "universal energy" to be revealed or not. It depends on who performs the experiment, and for what purpose. If the goal is only to prove - it probably won't work. Miracles only happen to those who believe in them. Negative energies of skeptics can spoil the success of the experiment. It is possible that the energy chooses not to reveal itself yet, because humanity is not yet ready to be exposed to the truth." - Indeed, the ways of energy are wonderful.
The other way is to weaken science. This is done in the following ways:
- • "It's only a matter of time. Today, science cannot prove it, but in the future, when the devices improve, it will be possible to measure it." – Again, a philosophically absurd claim. If the concept is immaterial, no instrument can ever measure it.
- • "It's just a matter of time. In the future someone will arise who will be able to explain it" - explain what? As long as the existence of some phenomenon is not proven, there is nothing to explain. For example, if a "powerful person" claims that he can predict the side on which a coin will fall, but he has not yet bothered to count how many of the cases he was right and how many he was wrong, there is nothing to explain at all. If he shows that he is right in 80% of the cases (in a large number of tosses), there is something to investigate.
- • "The scientists do not understand anything. They are wrong and change their minds all the time. Theories rise and fall. Who are they to talk about concepts like truth or true?" - Such a statement indicates a complete lack of understanding of the essence of science. This is precisely the strength of science, not its weakness - its openness to changing its mind in the face of new and contradictory facts and admitting mistakes if any.
- • "These scientists are simply narrow-minded and lack the mental openness to accept ideas that do not coincide with the scientific establishment" - to accuse the scientists of being narrow-minded is ridiculous. After all, science stands on the shoulders of creative, curious, broad-minded people, with extraordinary inspiration, breaking boundaries and maybe even subversive and rebellious. Many of the scientists would dream of revolutionizing their field of research, bringing an innovative theory with greater descriptive and predictive power, etc. Of course, you can always find narrow-minded people, in any field. The people of the New Age will also be very narrow-minded, if they continue to clash with reality, or with simple alternative explanations for the phenomena they experience.
- At the end of the scale we encounter frontal attacks on science and claims of conspiracies of sorts. In the fields of alternative medicine, the spirits are particularly angry: there are "alternative therapists" who spread the idea that conventional medicine is more harmful than helpful and preach to patients to stay away from conventional treatments and vaccines, contrary to everything known so far. I came across statements such as: "Meanwhile, those who have a license to practice medicine do not heal, but make their patients chronically ill." or "Our knowledge of healing does not reach the Western doctors. If he had come, they would have stopped prescribing drugs and started practicing real healing. The inevitable result was that people were healthy. The pharmaceutical and food industries would lose a lot of money. That's why it won't happen. The pharmaceutical industries hide this knowledge." Or "any proof that alternative medicine of any kind is effective in curing diseases, is a danger for pharmaceutical companies and Western medicine. They have a very strong lobby and very strong financial support to torpedo any move that proves otherwise and they do it all the time."
It is easy to see how the people of the New Age try to eat the cake and leave it intact, even at the cost of logical contradictions: when this can serve their beliefs, they use science in a selective and distorted way. When this goes against their beliefs, there are voices of disdain for science and scientists and even a frontal attack.
But the real danger, in my opinion, is where the boundaries blur, between New Age and science, between faith and knowledge, between what goes on inside our heads and the objective reality outside. This is where the New Age tries to pass itself off as science.
pretending to be science
Science is a centuries-old human enterprise, which tries to identify the signal in the noise, the order in the chaos, the simple legality in the infinitely complex world in which we live. The road is not easy, full of shocking discoveries, revolutions and developments. The scientific enterprise can be compared to assembling a giant puzzle, a craft in which thousands of people all over the world are engaged in cooperation, without a super organization directing or managing them. Everyone tries to add a puzzle piece to the picture being built. Many attempts do not turn out well - the part that at first glance looks like a promising addition to the puzzle sometimes turns out to be inappropriate when you examine it more closely. Sometimes the component itself notices the discrepancy and removes the part immediately, so as not to confuse the others involved in the craft. Sometimes it takes a careful eye from other puzzle pieces to remove the wrong piece.
Pseudo-science sabotages this delicate craft. This is an activity that is not scientific but masquerading as such, flaunting external signs of science: using concepts that are not understandable to the common man but sound impressive, graphs, numbers, statistical calculations - any sign that gives a garnet of accuracy and reliability in the eyes of the common man. Pseudoscience is characterized by shaky and amateur research methods (if they exist at all), it does not undergo serious criticism by other researchers and its claims are not supported by experiments.
The main distinguishing mark of pseudo-science is the lack of principled ability to disprove the claims experimentally: if the claimant is unable to define a situation in which his claim will be unequivocally disproved, it is probably pseudo-science. This is exactly the state of things regarding that "cosmic energy" that can present itself in the results of experiments or not according to its disappearing considerations. Therefore, in principle, it is not possible to disprove the existence of that energy ever (perhaps on purpose she made sure that an experiment to identify it would fail?). Such claims will never enter the realm of science.
Another ominous sign is if the claims have already been disproved in the past, but the claimants excuse the failure in any way possible and continue to hold on to their claims no matter what. Real science separates from false theories (even if it takes a few years). Reality is the ultimate test. All the examples that the people of the New Age leap up and bring up for cases where a mistake or even charlatanism was discovered in the fields of science only strengthen my argument - the fact is that these cases have become history - for lessons that are learned by future generations of scientists, and found their expression in improvements in research methods.
Examples of pseudoscience in varying degrees of severity: astrology, numerology, healing, reiki, telekinesis, extrasensory perception, graphology, cellular memory, research of ghosts and haunted houses, reincarnation, homeopathy, applied kinesiology, reflexology, applied kinesiology, magnet healing.
The factors that help the alarming spread of pseudo-science
Pseudo science is usually characterized by an attractive and sensational fragrance. The media write about such materials and distribute them enthusiastically to increase ratings. The writers themselves, who are usually devoid of any scientific education, contribute to exaggerations, distortions, and drawing rash conclusions.
Celebrities who believe in one or another pseudo-science are invited to talk shows and tell personal anecdotes from their lives. This of course increases even more the "illusion of credibility" that is created in the viewer who lacks the tools of critical thinking.
Presentation of pseudo-scientific topics in the media is usually characterized by a complete imbalance between the opinions of the "believers" and the opinions of the "skeptics".
Beyond reporting, the media produces content in the fields of pseudo-science and further intensifies the blurring between imagination and reality. "Reality" programs like "Uri Geller - the heir” are presented as “the real thing” even though it is a group of wizards (members of the Wizards' Association) who violated the wizards' convention according to which they are not allowed to claim supernatural powers. In addition, they received cooperation from celebrities who served as an audience (a fact that was hidden from the viewers, of course). In short - charlatanism from A to Z. Watch the brave disclosure of Guy Pines.
Blockbuster movies and series about ghosts, reincarnations, superheroes, alien invasions, sorcerers, psychics - wash over us all the time. These contents satisfy the viewer's imagination and serve as an escape from everyday reality, and there is nothing wrong with that of course. But the enormous amount of these contents, the absolute realism in which they are presented, and the compatibility between the contents and popular beliefs in the public, all of these may blur the line between imagination and reality for quite a few people.
In terms of the distribution of content by private individuals - the use of e-mails and social networks allows the distribution of any story picked up from the finger immediately and at unprecedented rates. The more sensational the story is and the more strongly it appeals to emotion, the greater its circulation.
It is in fact a fatal man-made process in which delusional (but desirable) ideas are amplified by mass distribution with the support of the media, are given a scientific touch by the creators of various pseudo-science fields, and are even proactively produced by the entertainment industries for profit. The common man finds himself in front of an amplified, extroverted and completely distorted version of wishes that passed through the minds of individuals. In such a reality, it is no wonder that claims that have no grip on reality become self-evident regarding such a significant percentage of the population.
So people believe in all kinds of magic. What's wrong with that actually?
As long as a person is only responsible for himself, any attempt by me to point out dangers will sound like self-righteousness or pushing my nose into places that are not my business. People who developed a complete mental dependence on cults and sorcerers, people who invested all their money in dubious "counseling sessions", people who chose to die with the help of drugs without any physical activity, in the end this is their free choice.
Things start to get more problematic when unfounded beliefs start to affect the lives of others, here are some chilling examples:
- Parents who, instead of calling an ambulance to save the baby (from severe infection and breathing difficulties), engaged in prayers for long hours. The baby died (and the parents were sent to prison).
- The parents of a 9-month-old baby who suffered for a long time from a severe infection chose not to give her conventional treatment (which would have saved her for sure) but homeopathic treatment (whose effectiveness has never been proven). The girl died (the parents were sent to prison).
- These are not isolated cases. A study published at the University of California in 1998 surveyed 172 cases of children who died as a result of "faith healing" in the USA between 1975-1995. 140 of them had a higher than 90% chance of surviving had they received adequate medical treatment. These deaths are attributed to 23 different religious sects in 34 countries.
And what happens when people in public positions make business, policy and security decisions that affect the entire public based on rituals whose validity has never been verified, or worse - has been refuted in the past? Business decisions based on "voices they hear", political and policy decisions based on consultation with sorcerers and sorcerers of all kinds? This is getting interesting.
Another widespread effect results from the redirection of resources from areas of evidence-documents to areas of evidence-documents. We encounter phenomena such as:
- • Subsidy of illusion-supported medicine at the expense of evidence-based medicine, by the HMOs (an action which, unfortunately, does not indicate anything about the effectiveness of the subsidized healing methods, but only the desire of the HMO to remain attractive in the eyes of the customer compared to the competing HMOs that included such treatments in their framework).
- • Investments by private individuals in establishing entire colleges to study illusions, instead of directing funds to places that are really in need.
- • Penetration attempts of the fields of illusory certified medicine into academic educational institutions and thus a complete blurring between science and pseudo-science.
On the broadest level, things may reach a real threat to the stability of society.
People who hold unfounded beliefs and are sure of their rightness, people who refuse to change their minds in the face of facts, people who are unable to think clearly and skeptically are grains of gunpowder. It didn't take much to coalesce them into a dangerously explosive mass. All that is missing is a charismatic leader who will unite them under one desirable and unfounded idea or another, and hell is the limit.
Many sects have arisen throughout history, with the gurus/messiahs who stood at the head of them taking advantage of exactly this type of people. Let's briefly mention one of the most famous recent cases: in the spring of 1997, 39 members of a cult called "Heaven's Gate" committed mass suicide in California. They believed that when they die they leave their physical receptacle and thus release their souls to travel aboard a spaceship that follows the comet Hale-Bop (which passed that year near the Sun). Some of them castrated themselves earlier to prepare for the genderless life that awaits them after their death.
What can you do about it?
It is very difficult to change people's minds, especially when it comes to things based on emotion rather than fact, such as certain New Age beliefs. All the more difficult to change a way of thinking.
Any attempt to convince a believer immediately arouses defensive resistance, and at the end of the argument the believer only strengthens his faith. Devout believers are a lost audience in advance, especially those that are their profession.
The relevant adult audience to address is the "floating voices" - all those people who have not formed a clear opinion. On the one hand, they are drawn to the seductive voices that rise from the New Age depths, and on the other hand, they find it difficult to deny reality.
The tactic that seems to me the most promising for influence is the one in which the way of thinking is emphasized and not the conclusion that is being pursued, a tactic in which questions are asked, doubts are raised: "What other explanation could there be for this?" "How can we check which of the explanations is correct?" to lead the person along the path of investigation.
I believe that a militant approach gains a sympathetic audience only among the enthusiastic supporters, and they are precisely the audience that is least important to influence.
Scientific knowledge probably won't solve the problem. The roots of the problem lie in the way of thinking, and not in the familiarity with this or that information. A study done in the USA in 2002 found that there is no real connection between knowledge of scientific concepts and the level of belief in various pseudo-sciences. Memorizing scientific facts without understanding the way in which they were arrived at is not at all different from blind faith in New Age claims, and therefore is probably not immune to them.
I am convinced that the only way to bring about a significant change is by educating all students from a young age to think sharp. The children are the ones who shout "the king is naked" naturally, and this is the right time to encourage them to continue doing so wherever it is necessary.
- The sharp thinking approach: it is not actually about scientific knowledge, but thinking principles that are easy to learn, practice and internalize. Acquiring a way of thinking that examines, questions and investigates together with built-in tools to do so, acquiring the habits of searching for support and substantiating claims.
- Experiential learning: experiments, exercises, videos, discussions, self-inquiry. Personal experience is the main reason for people to start believing in things that are not true, and therefore I believe that it is also the main reason through which doubts can be raised. When someone realizes that he was wrong about something about which he feels right with certainty, the experience is enacted. Next time he will also doubt his own personal experience.
- Relevant knowledge in the field: familiarity with historical anecdotes, acts of charlatanism, mistakes and successes in science, important concepts from the world of scientific and psychological research, familiarity with the failure mechanisms of the human brain and perceptual and psychological biases.
- Vaccination shots: I believe that even a point exposure to demonstrations of sharp thinking can be effective in the long term and even for life. Anyone who participates in the "Holy Water" experiment will be suspicious of kinesiology therapy even after 20 years. Anyone who sees Uri Geller's exposure while a child will be suspicious of any person of his type who will appear even when he is an adult.
And no less important - always be a true skeptic, one who doubts even his own words. Thorough, responsible, listens, admits a mistake. It is right to change one's mind in the face of sufficiently convincing evidence. Be careful not to fall into the trap of untested claims.
There is only one thing I am not ready to doubt - actually casting doubt as the healthy and correct way of thinking.
73 תגובות
bendvir@gmail.com
Indeed there is no chance…..
I landed at your place in search of Hebrew material on astrological weather forecasting. Among the scholars, this matter went out of fashion a few hundred years ago, but before that they used to own it, and even today they print and sell calendars with a forecast for each day - see about Knauer and his centenary calendar hundertjähriger Kalender on Wikipedia in German, where there is also a link to the same online calendar. The students of the daily page encountered the concept a few months ago in Rashi on Shabbat Aa. In order to explain to the Hebrews what is written there in Rashi, I would be happy to use something ready-made in Hebrew and not to translate and concoct something myself.
There are quite a few publications on free energy engines. Why is there no factual approach to the issue, is there no chance that this will exist? Or is it part of a plan that wants to stop this direction?
: )
jubilee:
Things you see from here you don't see from there 🙂
Mud slinging, like impersonation and an inexhaustible variety of schticks, is the denier's very last resort.
This is not true. We have no difficulty abandoning belief in something that has been proven to be false.
Science may be the right way to refute, but the "scientists" are not always honest and the tests they conduct are biased in advance.
Therefore, as long as the way to "refute" it is not correct, it is not refuted.
The tendency to adopt superstitions is indeed one of the products of evolution.
Whoever reads Dawkins' book "Unraveling the Rainbow", will find there wonderful examples of the adoption of superstitions by animals.
The tendency to recognize patterns is indeed what stands behind those superstitions and this tendency - as Gilad explained - tends towards the "safer".
This tendency - as a product of evolution - is - as mentioned - something we share with the animal world.
In other words - whenMy father c. Chattering - he shows that he doesn't know this, so reading the above-mentioned book is especially recommended for him.
The ability to think and analyze in depth - the one that is not based only on an immediate reaction but on actual long-term planning - is a relatively new thing - something that the human race excels in is what allows it to rule the world.
This ability allows us to rise above those superstitions and choose the things we believe in more intelligently.
All humans are born with this ability, but some of them lose parts of it during their lives - either due to brainwashing they received from their parents, or because they believed some liar in their adulthood - and in most cases - because they are "emotionally invested" in those beliefs.
This "emotional investment" is one of the things that science (with a touch of intellectual honesty) allows us to escape from.
In science - what is disproved by the experiment is not true and the belief in its correctness must be abandoned.
This is a step that some people find very difficult - as Trullino demonstrates to us.
monument
"The effectiveness of numerology, astrology and many other fields is built on these mechanisms. These play in our mind. A combination of a desire to believe, with the tendency to see order, meaning and causality in places where they are not found"
These words of yours are, have you based yourself on scientific research that proves these statements or maybe it is simply in your wild and unscientific but biased imagination according to your long-standing position. .
The only meaning that the person refers to is the information that he perceives in his five senses and their processing in his mind with the influence of emotion and intuition which causes the non-scientific situation meaning that science cannot define and prove a person's situation at a given moment.
And if the person saw something in the forest in his imagination, then it is absolute as far as he is concerned, and he will not go looking for Gilad to scientifically prove to him what it is
monument,
That is, if I understood correctly, the tendency to adopt false beliefs is some kind of instinct whose pattern is dictated by genes (literally genes. not "memes") and whose development is Darwinian, while scientific thinking is the product of experience, knowledge and investing a lot of effort in studying.
But this and this sit in the brain, and the brain is the same brain, and the genes are the same genes.
The fact of survival of the tendency to superstition among the human race is explained through Darwinism which originates from scientific thinking. There is an asymmetry between the two, since those who engage in superstitions see the development of knowledge as a negative phenomenon (for example, the myth of the "original sin" of transgressing the prohibition of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge), while scientific thinking accepts its rival in "forgiveness" and explains it through a scientific model who finds positive points in it.
Let us see the brain as a large governmental body divided into many wings and departments. Among other things, it has a section for superstitions and a section for scientific thinking. Each section receives budgets and uses them efficiently if possible. If the tendency to superstitions is significantly stronger than scientific thinking, it can be attributed to several factors, for example the following two: a) unbalanced budgeting; b) laziness.
In my response to another article I pointed out my discovery that the tendency to believe in astrology is stronger among women than among men. Only one sympathetic response was received there and no negative response. This is not a large enough sample to establish a theory, therefore I generalize the belief in astrology to a tendency to superstitions in general, and suggest looking for the roots of the tendency to laziness of certain centers in the brain in the set of genes in certain populations (not necessarily gender).
A really beautiful parable.
Now I want to illuminate it from a different angle.
Our brains have evolved over the years to recognize patterns, correlations, causes and effects. Correct identification of a predator, the cause of a disaster, etc. is critical to survival.
Our brain prefers detecting a falsehood over making such a connection wrong, because the price of believing in a connection that is not necessarily true is lower than the price of making a real connection wrong.
When you're walking in a destination and you think you see a predatory animal about to jump on you, it's better to run away even if it's just a random shape of bushes that looks like the head of an animal, than to stop and examine the matter in depth and find out that it is indeed the head of a predatory animal...
Since this is the case, our mind tends to find meanings, reasons, patterns, etc. even in places where they do not exist in reality. All these can be called superstitions, superstitions, etc.
The effectiveness of numerology, astrology and many other fields is built on these mechanisms. These play in our mind. A combination of a desire to believe, with the tendency to see order, meaning and causality in places where they are not found.
Scientific thinking comes to differentiate between the things that appear to be meaningful from those that are indeed meaningful in external reality, to differentiate between imaginary causes and real causes. and so'.
Monitor our brain illusions.
I fondly remember my chemistry teacher in the Jud class, Aryeh Rosenberg (today Rogel). He illustrated for us the way scientists build models. He brought us a parable about a boy who is lost in the forest, and when night falls he asks to light a fire. He is looking for objects that he can set on fire. The first night he finds a tree trunk, and is happy to see that it burns beautifully. He tells himself with satisfaction that round objects are burning, and the next day he collects round objects: round pebbles, an iron pipe with a diameter of two zul and a wheelbarrow wheel. To his disappointment, none of these are on fire, and he is almost freezing cold. The next day he thinks of a different model: since the bone that burned on the first night was indeed round but also a tree trunk, the idea arises to look for tree trunks. He collects only tree trunks, ignoring twigs, newspapers, cotton fibers, straw bales and more. Some of the races are indeed lit, but not all. He notices that those that are not lit are wet. The next day, he only looks for dry materials, ignoring, among other things, a small oil jar from the Maccabean times (this is a topical decoration of mine. In the original parable it was an oil can). The rest of the nights he manages to light a fire, but we know he could have done better.
"The analogy" Arie explained to us, "is that science works through experimentation and trial and error." Later I met him and reminded him of oblivion. I told him that the scientific method does not give a perfect positive answer, and I reminded him of the Hanukkah miracle that was performed. "Of course!", he replied, "Science is strong in refutations but weak in predictions. That's why we must continue to look for and try even options that seem improbable to us." And here comes this discussion about illusions and New Age and reminded me of a dear person from the past and also that vanity beliefs are known to make an important contribution to the progress of science.
Moshe,
You say: "In addition, you and your friends have an attitude that science represents the absolute truth and any other belief is fundamentally invalid"
And this is where the problem arises, like my father C, you do not understand what science is. Science is simply a way of explaining phenomena.
A boy who encounters a faucet for the first time in his life plays with it and realizes that every time he turns it to the right water will come out. He is also a scientist.
There is no matter of belief or absolute truth here.
Science is based on trial and error observations Faith is based on gut feeling.
Science is the one who understood and developed statistics and understands what the chances of its prediction are, does astrology have any similar mechanism?
Have you ever heard an astrologer say that there is a 75% chance tomorrow that you will meet a person you have never met before?
Regarding the weather, you (and the truth is we all..) enjoy laughing at the forecasters and their failures. But if you think seriously, is there a better method? With the help of crystals/channeling/coffee/I Chi/astrology or any other method of predicting the future is it possible to achieve better weather forecasting over time than meteorology?
Moshe,
I will always prefer anything that gives predictions that are above the "level of chance", not because I think science holds the "eternal truth" or "absolute predictability", an idiotic opinion that you wrongly attribute to science, I will prefer to trust the predictions of science precisely for the simple reason that they manage to score what does happen in the best way relative to any other method and certainly much better than random selection. I didn't just choose meteorology, because even in meteorology, a branch where it is very difficult to make long-term and sometimes even short-term forecasts, the forecasts are still much better than any other method. Only a complete evil would choose to rely on methods whose degree of success is at the level of random selection, which is exactly the level that some of the New Age "methods" presented (at least those that have been tested in a controlled manner). As for many other branches of science, the precision is on orders of magnitude you can't even fathom, be it in time or space. But as you wrote earlier: "Science is simply something that works and nothing else."
When a person compares on the scales something that works versus something that doesn't work and the scales still don't point to what works, then something is very wrong with his scales (judgment). And what is your criterion for life? To act according to what was tested and found not to work? Or does it only work at the level of a placebo effect?
Moshe, I'm watching the exchange like this from the sidelines, and I really don't understand what you want to say.
Scientists arrive at scientific theories in one way or another, as Camila explained. It can be in a dream at night (after 20 years of thoughts on the subject), it can be in the inspiration of a moment or in any other way.
Then we approach to check if the theory they thought about is also correct, that is, suitable for reality.
This is not the end of the story, a good theory not only explains all the findings discovered to date (ad hoc explanation) but also predicts what will happen under certain conditions if they occur in the future.
Wait for such conditions to be met or - better if possible - proactively create such conditions and check what happens. Does it match the predictions of the theory or not?
If there are several possible theories that explain the findings, try to think of an experiment that will differentiate between them, that is, one in which all but the correct one will be rejected, if there is one.
If not - keep trying to look for other explanations.
A scientific theory is never "truth", but only a model of reality, an intermediate stage in the eternal search for "truth".
We may never reach the objective truth, which lies somewhere beyond our senses and our limited minds.
Good scientific theories have incredible predictive power - again, as Camila said - all modern technologies are based on theories, as strange as they may be: the GPS you have would probably not work correctly if relativistic corrections were not taken into account. The LED flashlight you have on your key chain would not have been created if the quantum theory was not correct. Etc. etc.
None of us talked about absolute truth, or the ability to predict scientific theories. only you.
And yet I hear a tone of rebellion and defiance in your words, and I don't understand why.
Do you have a theory that can predict things better?
Another way that can predict things better?
Another way that can bring you closer to knowledge about that reality that is "out there"?
Maybe you could share it with us? You can do an experiment and check the predictive ability of your tool. I would be very interested in such an experiment.
It may bring us 2.5 million dollars, international recognition, and possibly a Nobel Prize. what are you saying? Shall we go for it?
Come on, share with us! You can patent it first if you want. Even recommended.
Or is this another mysterious knowledge that has been kept secret for thousands of years and only you make a living from it?
Or do you have no better substitute for science, and are you just expressing frustration at our inability to truly understand the world? Or frustration for other reasons? I really have no idea.
Please - let's have a substantive discussion.
Let's assume that science is limited in its accuracy (there are cases where it is and there are many cases where it is not - for example in nanotechnology you can now manipulate individual atoms), so what, is the alternative more accurate?
If science is accurate in 95% of the cases, then mysticism is accurate in 0.00001% of the cases and that too by luck.
Ms. Camila
That's exactly what I commented on. On the almost compulsive belief in the absolute predictability of science.
How many times they said it would rain and take the umbrella for nothing.
Please try to check how many wrong weather forecasts there were just in the last week. Of all the scientific predictions of the weather on Earth.
Meteorology is still a very imprecise science in many cases.
And all other sciences are still very limited in their accuracy.
Moshe,
I conclude from your response that April XNUMXst. Any other explanation makes no sense.
Science predicts that it will be cold and rainy at the end of the week, since you claim that you don't believe that science can predict, so I hope for you that you go for a walk in a place where there is no shelter and you don't take an umbrella with you and then we will talk again and I will explain to you the difference between the scientific approach and the New Age idiots, continue the path of the dark The Middle Ages.
Mr. Rothschild
Does not matter.
What does matter is that it bothers you and your friends that there are people with beliefs that go beyond the scientific framework.
In addition, you and your friends have an attitude that science represents the absolute truth and any other belief is fundamentally invalid.
Need some balance Science is just something that works and nothing else. And yet it is very limited.
We don't even know why science works. You yourself admitted that no one has any idea why theories even work.
When someone wants to create a new theory it is always a gamble. No one could guarantee Einstein, Dirk, Schrödinger, and Shechtman that the theory they initiated would match reality and not be disproved.
Each of them was happy when their theory held up for the time being. And it is not known how long in the future this will last.
And still people believe in their ability to invent new theories and dedicate their lives to it.
As long as the process of scientific development depends on a bet, then faith in science rests on accumulated experience and nothing else. No one can guarantee that there will be further progress because there is no proven method to guarantee it.
Just as no one can predict how the capital market will behave. Black swans will always appear, and the science you admire is also controlled by black swans (see Nissim Taleb).
The trigger that made me comment what I commented here stemmed from the last line in Mr. Diamant's comparison table.
where he defines science as having the ability to predict.
I thought to myself that characterizing something or someone as having the ability to predict is idolatry.
Because it means that you believe in a prophet who prophesies and then you actually believe in him as having superior powers that must be obeyed.
So tell me how this approach is different from the New Age believers?!
To my father b. And to Gilead:
Why do you argue with every commenter who believes in any nonsense.
Ask the respondents to say what came out of their beliefs, besides wars?
On the other hand, ask them that if they think that "science is just a theory" that they stop using the products of science. They won't go to the doctor, they won't take medicine, they won't use the TV, the phone, the car on the plane and the list is endless.
Moshe:
You didn't understand me but I was desperate because it seems to me that the misunderstanding stems mainly from an agenda
Mr. Rothschild
Your explanation is indeed a wonderful example of tautology.
But that's not what I mean.
However, your claim that a theory creates the ability to calculate is fundamentally disproved. Because it is possible to check the evolution of theories on different subjects. The initiative to create a new theory in quantum physics stemmed from the desire to calculate things that the theory that preceded it was not good enough. And since this process lasted more than a century. There is no reason to assume that this process is over. On the contrary, it can be assumed according to the progress on the timeline that in more than a hundred years.
The theory governing those areas of quantum physics will look completely different. Which would make it the standard model for the history of science.
And if you check in a hundred years or in 500 years how all the theories have developed over the years.
It will become clear to you that they are all just a good guess that suited the time and that the very fact that a theory provided results
Somehow made it an absolute truth for that time. It is clear that with the development of new theories that will allow a better control over physics these truths will become completely relative truths.
Elementary, R.H. Dear, Elementary.
God only has a certain and finite amount of intelligence, beauty, health, money, joy, longevity, etc.
God loves us all equally, doesn't he? (Except for you and me of course, which he likes more).
He has to share what he has with everyone, right? (Except for you and me of course, he gave us everything).
Well, then what is not clear?
By the way, in my previous response I can add, alongside the social status, also the earning capacity
R.H.:
I actually have a theory regarding the reason for the success of delusional ideas.
Science is hard.
You have to constantly think, learn, try to understand, reconcile contradictions, etc.
Not everyone has the ability or the energy to do this.
On the other hand, a person wants social status, and since knowledge and understanding confer social status, and since social status is a relative matter (that is, how I am in relation to others), then people who are unwilling or unable to acquire knowledge try to improve their status or their sense of status by understating its importance of the true knowledge and by replacing it with the mumbo jumbo they are able to conceive.
This explanation is not about those who just believe without checking, but about those who express themselves here on the site - those who try to sell this disgusting product.
Those who believe without testing are just people who have been deceived.
Many people (actually all of us) don't always check everything.
Sometimes we believe the words of someone who claims to have checked.
The people who were deceived are the ones who believed the charlatans from the above explanation.
My father c:
The site is free for you as long as you are allowed to express yourself on it.
Since you are flooding the site with nonsense while trying to hijack the discussions in directions that only interest people of the new age (the new name of the Dark Ages) you deserve to be blocked for flooding.
Avi Blizovsky:
Is he not defaming?
I find it difficult to relate to this response https://www.hayadan.org.il/illusion-pandemic-1111113/#comment-319747 (eg) as a response that is not defamatory.
Quote: "With no choice, I came to the conclusion that you have some kind of sick freak (who taught you this?) like a person who goes round and round on an endless path that cannot break through it and so you are stuck inside yourself to such an extent that a phobia of changing a position or a thought could destroy you."
Moshe:
The opposite is true - in every sense.
I read your words and understood them and I get the impression that you did not understand my words.
You say "a basic scientific premise is that the development of a theory is conditional on the ability to calculate results in accordance with the results of the experiment."
Do you really mean it?
How exactly do you calculate when there is still no theory?
The development of the theory is not conditional on the ability to calculate the results - it creates this ability.
If the calculated results match the experiment, the theory receives confirmation, if not, it is disproven, but there is no condition for developing the theory.
"The problem is that no one knows how to explain why a theory works at all."
Certainly no one knows how to explain why the theory works - after all, one of the goals of the theory is to be an explanation for the results of the experiment. If there was an explanation for the reason why the theory works, then for obvious reasons we would take this explanation itself as the theory since the theory derives from it and all the predictions of the theory are its predictions.
In other words - what you said here is a tautology that does not add any information.
The rest of your words also amount to a trivial sentence, if I agree we will get something like "we still don't know everything".
It is also known that we will never know if the theories we have are correct.
This is the human condition and there is no escaping it.
That's why I said that Gilad didn't need your lecture and that the only role this lecture could have had was to raise the horn of pseudo-science versus science.
Kamila Gilad and others,
What is not clear to me is the source of the appeal of the mystical teachings even though they are true. It is not that in science there are no wonders, strange, mysterious and interesting things. It's not that the mystical teachings are simple to understand, it seems to me that the complexity of Kabbalah and astrology sometimes exceeds that of scientific theories.
So why are people willing to invest so much time and effort in things that are unfounded and don't work?
This question appears at the beginning of the book Haunted World by Carl Sagan in which he describes a taxi driver who controls and knows a lot about Atlantis, the Bermuda Triangle, extraterrestrials, etc., but he is not interested in hard core science that has reached achievements such as putting a spacecraft on Mars, curing diseases, cloning animals, Worldwide communication and the creation of illuminating mice (for the bizarre if that's what you're looking for).
Mr.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/illusion-pandemic-1111113/#comment-319798
Of course, but those who are used to not seeing internal contradictions in his words (and when they show him then he ignores them) obviously will not see or accept the absurdity of such a sentence which immediately drops the ground under the words of that rascal. I am especially amused to see situations in which people of this type make claims to their environment that it is not open enough in its way of thinking, suddenly get terribly angry when someone does something that is not in line with their opinion, which turns out to be quite narrow when you look at their actual actions and not what they tell themselves.
R.H
Surely there is such a technology, why haven't you heard about a mezuzah? 🙂
Moshe,
Not sure what you want. Do you have a better method than the scientific one? After all, the result test shows that for now it works wonderfully.
The method is simple. There is a phenomenon. Let's try to guess what could have caused her. We will examine the alternative explanations.
The way of the exam will be a prediction of the explanation for the results of an experiment that has not yet been done. If one of the explanations did predict the results of the experiment, we will accept it as the most correct, but we will continue to make predictions based on it and test them.
One of the decisive tests is the development of technology based on our understanding. Applying the understanding to a technology rule is the highest cognitive stage in the story.
In light of all this, deviant teachings do not work because it is not possible to produce predictions that will work with them and it is certainly not possible to produce technology based on them.
Moshe,
Scientific prediction will always be given some model of reality. Scientists propose various different models, usually based on the recognition of several facts that point to possible relevant factors from which a model can be developed. The model development stage is a stage that combines creativity, intuition but also a good recognition of the known facts. It's not just a guess, at least it's an informed guess (as opposed to all kinds of nonsense and conspiracy theories that not only contradict the known facts but sometimes also contradict the laws of logic). As soon as there is a model whose relevance to reality is built into it, because that's how it was built, it can be investigated and predictions can be made regarding scenarios for which the answer is unknown. It's not so clear what you were trying to emphasize, that science can't predict without a model (like, obviously?) that science can't predict what the next successful model will be (huh?) By Gilad so it's not so clear what you actually wanted to say.
Mr. Rothschild
Another note:
Because it is somewhat difficult to see how it is possible to build such a parent theory that would describe all the other theories.
Because the father's theory will also suffer from the same defect, that is, from being a good match of results through guesswork in retrospect but not initially.
Therefore, there will be an endless need for master theories, each of which will pretend to be the theory of everything, but it will only be a guess in retrospect.
Mr. Rothschild
Either you didn't read what I wrote or you didn't bother to understand the argument.
I will try to summarize in a different way.
A basic scientific premise is that the development of a theory is conditional on the ability to calculate results in accordance with the experimental results.
The problem is that no one knows how to explain why a theory works at all.
That is, why there is a compatibility, for example, between bunch theory and quantum chromodynamics, for example.
In this sense, it is a guess that works in hindsight.
If there were no other theory explaining how and how certain theories can be adapted to physical and other processes. You could come up with a theory in the first place without having to guess to fit the experiment.
In this sense, relativity and quantum theory, for example, are excellent guesses that work well in known areas of calculation.
On the other hand, because no one knows why each of them fits the relevant field in which it deals.
But none of them fit interchangeably into the field of the second theory.
Therefore, there is still no compatibility between the two theories. And no one has yet found why the theories cannot be connected.
withering:
What "Deat" was referring to is of course the constant contradiction that these morons fall into every morning.
After all, if no one has ownership of the truth, then neither do they, and it may be that this exact sentence they say ("No one has ownership of the truth") is not true and in fact there are those who have ownership of the truth.
Moshe:
What brought you to the conclusion that Gilad needs the lecture you gave.
In practice - scientific theories (not science) have the ability to produce reliable predictions - so reliable that even staunch New Agers are willing to bet their lives on them - otherwise there would be much more space on buses, planes, and in line at the health insurance fund.
The fact that there is always room for improvement in the ability to predict still does not obscure the dramatic difference between the ability to predict the theories produced by science and the ability to predict the theories produced by pinching theories from the finger.
Diamant
Forgive me sir, science has no ability to predict to begin with. It has a retrospective requirement for predictive ability.
If it had this feature to begin with, you could then know in advance what theories you need to invent to calculate physical processes, etc.
Scientific theories are only guesswork, with the requirement that they match the experiment as much as possible.
In many cases, they create several such theories or guesses. when each tries to improve the match
between the calculation and the experimental results. Take for example the development of the Sandratic model. Until the development of the final approach of
Field theory, calibration fields, renormalization and the like. There were quite a few guesses that were inadequately matched. Even today, the theory is still a guess. Because no one knows how to answer many questions on the subject.
For example, how to reconcile relativity with quantum physics.
So science is just a collection of guesses that manages to calculate what we know and nothing more.
No one can predict what the dominant physical theory will be in fifty years. Possibly the entire model
The standard will be irrelevant in relation to a much more successful theory that will be.
All in all, science is a successful collection of discounted ad hoc guesswork that works at the moment and that are content with what it currently gives.
In their opinion,
Imagination hallucinates paths. Science examines them and selects among them those that have a connection with reality according to predetermined criteria such as the ability to reproduce the results, the ability to predict results, etc. Every scientist contains both things, imagination and creativity on the one hand and strict criticism on the other. But while science cannot progress without the creative imagination, the latter can exist without science (see people like Avi C). There are many, many things in the imagination, there are unicorns, rainbows, spaghetti monsters, lightning and thunder and electricity, there is astrology, stars and galaxies, there are crystals, radioactivity and thermodynamics, and here is the problem, how can you know what is an imagination that has a basis in reality and what only appears that way by mistake ( Because of an optical illusion for example or because of a superstition or because of a cultural convention like religion for example)?
What does the sentence you wrote actually mean: "No one has ownership of the truth or knowledge"? Is every opinion equally true? Do you really think so? Or you mean to say that it is wrong for a certain person to determine that A is true and B is not true. Would you mind explaining what you mean?
Avi C. You are not slandering, but you do not understand the meaning of a site on the Internet. You don't need a balance on every site, it is enough that there is a balance between the science and conspiracies and other truth in general and that everyone will read what they want.
Try to insert a scientific argument into another truth and you will be hit on the head there - as happened to one who demanded that the illusory article published there about 2012 be based on any facts.
You have the right to believe in all the nonsense that exists on earth, but stop driving people crazy who are looking for other things. Talkbacks are also important, the fact that Yael was caught in the talkback of a global warming denier on the scientific website to which she was directed. And that's why I delete comments that scare people about vaccines - because people read something in talkbacks and think it's the site's opinion (someone wrote in YNET that she read an article in science and was convinced that there was no problem with vaccines, but then she saw the comments).
That's why we would be happy if you direct your efforts to sites that deny the science, where no one will oppose you and maybe even block the opponents. By the way, this is a big problem, while the scientific sites are pluralistic and allow anyone to respond even if they are lying, you will not find this on the religious sites or the conspiracy sites, so it is advisable not to abuse this openness.
Michael and I know that you are talking nonsense, but children who have no experience with astrological arguments may be convinced.
Do us a favor and free us from your punishment.
Best regards
Avi Blizovsky
Rothschild
The site is public and open to all as long as I or others do not defame it is legitimate.
If you don't want to face why are you repeating and answering writers you don't understand
What are they talking about and do not want to understand.
I found here how interesting they are to hear and even understand that the New Age does not help science to reach
the achievements
Science does not invent, it reveals what was already known many generations ago
If you cross information written in the Zohar to contemporary findings you will be surprised and more you may be
A great rabbi in Israel with God's help.
Abi C and you know:
Maybe you will start a blog called "Hahoza" for yourselves and your friends and dismiss us from your stupid comments?
This site is for people who are interested in science and you are clearly not like that.
I'll add and say:
Although science is an important navigator in reality,
But imagination is an equally important navigator.
Good Day.
knowledge
Every word carved in stone
It's interesting that you chose the nickname Daat - the opposite of what you wrote:
"No one owns the truth or the knowledge"
In my opinion, the New Age and science go hand in hand, supporting each other and improving each other
As in the Torah, there is in it scientific knowledge of the highest level that was unknown for many years, only in the last hundred years when science developed tools and established a number of axioms, it reveals and proves what is written in the Torah.
No one owns the truth or the knowledge:
It is similar to a leaf blowing in the wind that thinks it is the tree...
Science is just taking its first steps,
And already he thinks that he sees everything and that he knows everything.
So he doesn't…. 🙂
monument
I read a lot of philosophical and scientific literature and I have never come across a pile of sentences that make up an article that is full of contradictions, full of your basic misunderstanding of concepts and worst of all arrogance and scientific narcissism.
Without a choice, I came to the conclusion that you have some kind of sick freak (who taught you this?) like a person who goes round and round on an endless path that cannot break through and thus you are stuck inside yourself to such an extent that a phobia of changing a position or a thought could destroy you.
Along with that if it makes you happy and as Descartes said "I write articles means I exist" then I can understand what is hidden behind your articles.
Best regards.
My father c.
Avi,
I don't think we met.
How come you are so convinced that we are all "hollow technocrats, cold and alienated"?
"The inspiration, the imagination, the vision, the flight" - these are undoubtedly qualities required of every great scientist, and indeed the great ones were endowed with them.
Also the rest of your review - it is not clear what you are relying on. What anger!
I suggest you take another look at the diagram above, the two axes and the two types of goals are worthy and welcome.
I just don't understand what you are upset about.
As you were already answered in connection with the article on cold reading, in regards to right or wrong, there is a not bad toolbox that has developed over the years - the scientific tools. There are no better tools. If you disagree with that - please respond in a pointed and to the point way and we can develop a discussion. Do you know another tool for news?
This is about news. Not about other things.
Just a few moments ago I finished playing for an hour along with music that I really like. I really enjoyed it. What is the connection? There is no connection.
Hey friend, wake up from the self caress it leads you to narcissism.
Why should you close your eyes, aren't you scientists for whom truth is a candle to your feet.
If everything was so objective you would be robots without freedom of choice.
The agreement above shames its owner - Archimedes would have laughed in your face and would have replaced the words spiritual with the scientific tools. Because the scientific tools are like the coal in the painter's hand which is the spirit behind reality.
If you look in the mirror you will indeed see the coal chalk and you will not see the inspiration, the imagination, the vision, the flight and the faith,
You are hollow technocrats, cold and alienated with a lot, it seems to me, that leads you like infinity to nowhere.
Life is the totality of all the situations that exist in reality, therefore spirituality/nefesh/soul should not be separated from the scientific practical activities that help a person to survive physically and to be eternal in his soul.
My father c.
Avi:
This reminds me of the comment I made to you a long time ago about the disappearance of the link to "content partners" from the site.
After all, this is actually what it's all about - not just Gilead.
Kamila and Gilad, I am preparing to use these materials in accordance with the website.
I will also make sure to link to the blog from all of Gilad's addresses.
father
The New Age is mostly an entertainment system. There are damages and crimes in it - you will find it in every system of human activity, including in science and medicine.
To a large extent the New Age is an offshoot of religions, usually minus their murderous ideology.
The New Age expresses in its magical thinking a delusion on a public level, and in this it is no different from several other human systems, which are well known in Israel
It looks interesting, but there's no way I'm reading an article that, if I were to print it, I would have 577 pages, God forbid (sorry to all the atheists) but oh my, look how small the scroll is 🙁
happily. Everything I post on my blog is in the public domain, and now it's just a matter of coordination between my father and myself to create a closer merger.
There are other people (members of the skeptic community) who write things on their blogs, and of course it would be helpful if they were all exposed in an orderly manner to as many people as possible.
A consolidated list of many of the authors can be found here - http://planet.skeptics.org.il/
The point is really to arrange the material in an orderly manner according to categories, etc.
Indeed, I see a waste of energy in that:
A) Good material gets lost in the depths of the endless internet.
b) People have to reinvent the wheel with each of their responses, and they probably don't have time to get to all the "evidence" required to provide serious and deep answers.
This is one of the reasons why I write my blog.
In the end, I think it would be good if there was an organized knowledge site, in Hebrew, like this amazing site (to which I turn first when someone mentions some new whimsical concept):
http://www.skepdic.com/contents.html
The presentation was prepared in honor of the lecture at the event of the site of knowledge.
monument,
Thank you for the serious and important article, it is obvious that a lot of thought was put into it. Recently I had the chance to read a little on your excellent blog and I thought to myself that there are so few sites that can be a kind of alternative to the surrounding superstitions and how nice and useful it would be if there was a wider cooperation between those individual pages like the science site and your website. That's why I was especially happy to see your article here and I suggest to the leaders of the science site and to you that you maybe cooperate more closely because I have been impressed that one site often complements the other site and results in a synergistic effect (the whole is greater than the sum of its parts). For example, questions sometimes arise on the science site, either by curious people who really want to learn or by trolls whose only concern is to create provocation and pump up their meager merchandise, and it seems to me that there are already quite a few good and well-arranged answers that fit these topics and that can add to and complement the efforts of the respondents The critics here bother to provide. An upgrade to the user experience can perhaps be achieved in a simple way by the connectivity between the sites, both on the main page and from within the articles/posts, alternatively perhaps it is possible to simply allow you to add some articles in the relevant categories based on what you have already written.
A power point presentation is really New Age and not professional.
Magic is half trouble.
Magic masquerading as science - a bundle of trouble...
Gilad, regarding water and its magical properties - our "sages" also dealt with this, for example: an evil spirit enters to drink water on Wednesday night and Saturday night
http://www.daatemet.org.il/medicine.cfm?ISSUE_ID=995
Indeed, words as encouragement, even though I take issue with the leniency that emerges from the following sentence: "Both goals are worthy goals in my view, and I respect one or another "spiritual" activity that improves the consciousness of the person who engages in it, just as I value one or another "scientific" activity which advances our knowledge and understanding of the external world in which we live."
In fact, this phrase itself is flawed in the confusion of the areas that the author warns against. If it is possible to really know that this or that activity results in an "improving of consciousness" of the one who engages in it and if that "improving of consciousness" is a definite thing, then all in all this is a scientific finding and this should not be used to give Gushpanka to the beliefs of the New Age.
I very much sympathize with the recommendations to immunize the youth against New Age beliefs through the education system.
In some of the discussions held here in the past I mentioned a letter I wrote on this subject to Yuli Tamir when she served as Minister of Education and in one of them I quoted this letter verbatim.
Here is the link to the quote:
https://www.hayadan.org.il/on-positive-and-negative-energies-1908085/#comment-77152
Thanks Carmela!
The NFA article, simply worded - conveys the message with surprising precision, a readable and sound analysis of a confused world whose considerations are very, very dark!!!
monument.
In the article about the Japanese Amoto, the fact that he was offered a million dollars if he managed to repeat the water experiment live on television was not mentioned.
Amoto refused.
Could it be that he is not so greedy? Just give up a million dollars?
At the reception center in Los Angeles they sell "blessed water" for $5 a bottle. Emoto is mentioned there in the context of molecular modification of water.
Business is booming.
An interesting, somewhat long and thought-provoking article
Thanks
I wrote in detail about "the effect of words written on notes on the form of ice crystal crystallization" here:
"What for all the blip are they talking about?! – The Japanese and his ice crystals” – http://wp.me/p1K6uX-b3
And in general, many more miracles and wonders happen on my blog - you are welcome!
monument
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0jJtQd1bUU
Is it also possible to complete a link to Guy Pines' article on Uri Geller?
What is the Holy Water Experiment?
An evening of horrors hahahahahahahahahahaha this is so funny
To illustrate the nothingness of the human experience, in a true perception of reality,
You should tell the old joke:
In anatomy class, in the dissection (autopsy) room, two female students are standing over the body and frantically picking at it.
The professor approached them and asked "It is permissible to know what you are looking for with such enthusiasm"
Of course, replied the two, we are of course looking for the Os Penis! (organ bone)
The professor sighed and said, we have a wonderful example of how misleading the human experience can be!
Sorry for the childish joke, but this is about the level of the New Age related facts and there is no need
To add again Einstein's statement about human stupidity.
Completion of links omitted from the article:
* Parents who instead of calling an ambulance to save the baby (from severe infection and breathing difficulties) engaged in prayers for long hours. The baby died (and the parents were sent to prison) - http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_19007118
* The parents of a 9-month-old baby girl who suffered for a long time from a severe infection chose not to give her conventional treatment (which would have saved her for sure) but homeopathic treatment (whose effectiveness has never been proven). The girl died (the parents were sent to prison) - http://www.smh.com.au/national/jail-for-parents-who-allowed-daughter-to-die-20090928-g8x2.html
* A study published at the University of California in 1998 surveyed 172 cases of children who died as a result of "faith-healing" in the USA between 1975-1995. – http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/101/4/625.abstract
Excellent article. But there is one caveat, which may explain why so many people choose the virtual reality of the Matrix instead of the real one.
The article ends with the sentences:
"And no less important - to always be a true skeptic, one who doubts even his own words. Thorough, responsible, listens, admits a mistake. It is right to change one's mind in the face of sufficiently convincing evidence. Be careful not to fall into the trap of untested claims.
There is only one thing I am not ready to doubt - actually casting doubt as the healthy and correct way of thinking."
I think of a certain room in the house, where it is highly recommended not to doubt yourself.
exciting! But I am one of those convinced that the majority of humanity is mistaken in grave illusions, some of which were mentioned in this article, and some in the words ofRoey Tsezana.
It seems to me that it would have been appropriate to divide the things into two publications on the website, so that Churchill's article about a report submitted to him would not be included, to say:
"This report, by its very length, defends itself against the risk of being read."