DisinfoCast: 51: Graham Hancock and ‘The War on Consciousness’

, , , , , , , , , ,

  • http://twitter.com/TedHeistman Ted Heistman

    I wonder about my own brain chemistry when the books of a guy that was smoking weed 16 hours a day for 20 years makes so much sense to me, when I hardly smoke at all.

    About the reductionist materialist paradigm: I really feel like I understand it. I feel like that’s consistent with it not being true. I could argue as a reductionist materialist. Make a sock puppet account and sound just like one. I could present their arguments sympathetically without creating straw men. I’ve yet to see a reductionist materialist that can do the same with an opposing viewpoint.

    In an argument generally the person that can grasp both sides equally well is the one that is right. Often the superior argument can fit the inferior one into itself as a subset of itself. Reductionists want to boil everything down to materialism vs. theism. But Hancock himself said he is not a theist. Clearly they simply don’t understand what he is saying.

  • drokhole

    Well done on the interview, Matt! The TED “debate” pages on each of these talks have become a bit stagnant. It is the third (I believe) forum for this ordeal, so most arguments have been exhausted (that’s not counting the discussion when these talks were up in the first place). Though, there are articles coming out in recent days that have only bolstered Sheldrake’s position:

    Scientists examine nothing, find something
    http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2013/0325/Scientists-examine-nothing-find-something

    The Scharnhorst Effect claims we’ve got the speed of light wrong
    http://io9.com/the-scharnhorst-effect-claims-weve-got-the-speed-of-li-458766433

    That being said, the top rated comment on each page is from Sheldrake and Hancock (respectively) offering themselves up for debate. That’s the only place I could see this going. I’d love to see it happen, though I doubt it will.

    • Matt Staggs

      Thank you!

  • echar

    Atheist churches! lol

  • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

    Glad to see TED revealed for who they truly are and who they are beholden to.
    The Prometheus tie in brings this to mind
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=01hbkh4hXEk

    • Charlie Primero

      Information consumers must always factor into the context who is sponsoring the information they are consuming. This has been a fact of life for thousands of years. For TED in this case Prudential, Siemens, and Pfizer probably dislike spreading the idea that alternatives to their products sometimes exist. http://www.ted.com/pages/tedtalks_sponsors

      • http://www.sacredgeometryinternational.com/ Camron Wiltshire

        Well said Charlie. I agree.

  • http://about.me/scott.bryson/ Scott Bryson

    Support group for the authors: Boycott TED support Graham Hancock, Rupert Sheldrake https://www.facebook.com/groups/boycott.ted

  • Charlie Primero

    Great interview Matt! Every time I fire up http://gpodder.org I hope a new episode of DisinfoCast shows up.
    More please!

  • http://joenolan.com/blog Joe Nolan

    Nice ‘cast Matt. Great to hear his own, always clear and determined ideas regarding TED’s hypocrisy. Thanks for cluing me in regarding the Prometheus tie-in.

  • dani pettas

    Awesome podcast.

21