Tag: science

Click here for YouTube version Click here for forum discussion Click here to post comments on AlexTsakiris.com Interview with esteemed Berkeley philosopher and consciousness researcher Dr. John Searle examines the state of academic consciousness research. Alex Tsakiris:  What we’ve been exploring is some of the evidence suggesting that consciousness may not be purely biological. We really started with parapsychology and folks like Rupert Sheldrake from Cambridge and  Dean Radin who used to be at Bell Labs and is at IONS. But put all that aside because the real kicker is near-death experience science. Here are these doctors, in hospital, carefully controlled experiments over and over again, and the brain you’re talking about, Dr. Searle, is gone. It’s non-functioning; it isn’t there; and yet some kind of conscious experience that’s able to see and recall what’s going on continues. That evidence is pretty overwhelming at this point. What do you do with that? How does that fit into your model? Dr. John Searle:   I don’t know. The stuff that I know about this tends to be rather anecdotal. Now maybe there is some really systematic, large-scale study of near-death experience that shows you can have consciousness without a brain but I don’t know of any such study. What I’ve heard is largely anecdotal. The mistake that people tend to make is they think, look, either these people are lying or there’s a miracle. Of course, both of those are probably wrong. People are perfectly sincere who report near-death experiences but it doesn’t follow that you can have consciousness completely separated from the brain; that this miracle is actually taking place. I’d have to know a whole lot more about it and see more systematic studies, as I said. The accounts that I’ve heard tend to be anecdotal. They tell a story about a guy who has had some unusual experiences. Alex Tsakiris:  There is actually a lot of published work on this. The best compilation is probably The Handbook of Near-Death Experiences edited by Jan Holden at the University of North Texas and Bruce Greyson at the University of Virginia, who is very well-known in this area. Dr. John Searle:   I don’t know enough about this stuff to have an intelligent opinion. Of course, it might turn out that 100 years from now we’ll have this conversation in heaven or in my case more likely the other place. The idea that you have to have a brain in order to be conscious, that’s a kind of silly idea people had back in the 21st Century. It might turn out that way; I don’t think it will. ---------- On today's episode I have an interview with Dr. John Searle.  Now, before we get to the interview I want to tee up a question for you.  As you know, I usually do this at the end of the show, but since the question relates to the quote you just heard,  and since the question relates to something else I want to talk about I'm going  throw it out there now -- How do you explain Dr. John Searle's willful ignorance of near-death experience science?  Moreover, why is he so clueless about parapsychology?  And most importantly, why does he think it’s ok to summarily dismiss all evidence pointing to any model of consciousness other than his hopelessly obsolete mind=brain clunker. Let’s consider near-death experience science since it's the most dramatic example of science that delivers an evidence-based kill-shot to the mind=brain carcass. How can a highly acclaimed, internationally renown expert on consciousness, who gives TED talks and is invited to scholarly symposiums on consciousness, how can that guy be less informed about the published peer-reviewed literature than your average Oprah Winfrey fan?  It's not like he doesn't understand what's at stake.  As you'll hear, he agrees the survival of consciousness question is central to all other scientific assumptions about consciousness.  So why is Dr. Searle shamelessly, unapologeticly ignorant of this science?  Well, that's the other thing I wanted to talk about before we get to this interview -- science bullies. Back in March of 2013, Robert McLuhan published an article on the organized effort of Skeptics/Atheists to rig Wikipedia (Guerrilla Skeptics).  By organizing themselves into a tight-knit team and dedicating themselves to making literally thousands rule-bending Wikipedia changes, these self-described Guerrilla Skeptics have had remarkable success.  For example, Parapsychology is a lost cause on Wikipedia. It's absolutely impossible to get anything close to a "neutral point of view" from Wikipedia on any parapsychology topic.  If you don't know what I mean, and you have a strong stomach, go to Wikipedia see for yourself.  If you're a listener to Skeptiko, and you have a really strong stomach, search "psychic detective." Now, if you are appropriately outraged, and have a strong masochistic streak, enter Wikipedia as an editor and try and straighten out one of those pages.  I mean, you're supposed to be able to do that, right?  Wikipedia is an open-source encyclopedia.  Anyone with knowledge of the subject is supposed to be able to edit, right?  But before you try and fix things over at Wikipedia read this blog post from Craig Weiler titled, The Wikipedia Battle for Rupert Sheldrake's Biography.  And then take a look at Dr. Rupert Sheldrake's article on the same topic (Wikipedia Under Attack). As a listener of this show, none of this is new to you.  You know the dogmatic craziness of these fundamentalist Skeptic/Atheist groups can rival any religious cult, but you might be surprised at the zeal with which these group are going after science.  Rupert Sheldrake after all isn't a bible-thumper.  He's not a creationist.  He hasn't taken a stand against, "a woman's right to choose", or called for a ban on gay marriage.  No, he's a Cambridge biologist who wrote a book about Dogs that Know When Their Owner's are Coming Home.  And followed it up with a book about how science might want to be a little less dogmatic about defending the materialistic status quo.  There are many highly esteemed scientists who think Sheldrake's ideas are brilliant and admire his willingness stand up to the attacks he's had to endure, but none of that matters to the science bullies. The biggest problem is not Guerrilla Skeptics on Wikipedia, or iTunes, or Reddit or any of the places  these folks go to try and heal their meaningless-by-definition lives (Atheist dogma, see: ep. 219, ep. 221).  The problem is the impact they have on Dr. John Searle.  Because you see, Berkley Philosophy professor, Dr. John Searle is not a professional Skeptic.  He's not a fire-breathing, you-are-a-biological-robot Atheist.  In fact, within the mainstream science community he's seen as a progressive because he's willing to reject the silliness of the "conciseness is an illusion" nonsense that still grips many die-hard materialists.  But when it comes to the tough stuff, the stuff that would truly set science free from the materialistic/reductionistic/atheistic dogma that cripples it, Searle is willfully ignorant.  Is it an ignorance borne out of a chummy academic life and a long list of accomplishments?  Perhaps.   But I think this ignorance is also a byproduct of a materialistic science culture that has been traumatized into complacency by Skeptical Bullies who push, shove, and spit insults any free-thinking academic who dares to challenge their status quo.  It's not that Searle is playing to the Skeptics; he's unwittingly absorbed their eyes-wide-shut worldview into his own without forethought or deliberation... and that's the greatest threat to science. So, let's hear from Dr. John Searle.  It's a short interview, mainly because I ran out of things to say to someone who thinks parapsychology died with J. B. Rhine in 1980 (continued below). Play It  Listen Now: Download MP3 (34 min.) Read It: Today we welcome esteemed Berkeley philosophy professor, Dr. John Searle to Skeptiko. Dr. Searle has a worldwide reputation for his acclaimed work on the philosophy of mind and language. He’s the author of over a dozen books and hundreds of articles and papers exploring issues of consciousness and mind/body mysteries. Dr. Searle, welcome to Skeptiko. Thanks so much for joining me. Dr. John Searle:   Thanks for having me.