Pseudoscience in the classroom

[Kitsune]

I'm not too popular in my World Religions class at the moment.

Some background, first, before I get to the big questions: One week before he was to lecture to class, a guest speaker came in and distributed free copies of his book that discusses how he believes science and spirituality will find common ground in the future and that it will somehow have to do with dark matter and its energy -- something he calls "subtle bodies". We were told to read through the book to get a good understanding of the guy's field of expertise and formulate questions for him based on the material.

By the time I got halfway through the book, I was so frustrated that I had a very difficult time finishing. I underlined some research he cited and spent some days doing some of my own. Sure enough, during his lecture on how we're all connected via invisible dark matter, he brought up some amazing bits of information that had been "confirmed by credible experts". As he described the findings, many in the class gasped in awe. Here are some examples:

* The Backster experiments have shown that plants react to a person's thoughts via a lie detector attached their leaves. Concentrating on a plant with the intent to harm it will cause the lie detector to spike. This has something to do with "subtle bodies".

*On similar lines, it has been shown that pets waiting at home for their owners to return will react to their owner leaving work and, in some cases, the pet's owner simply thinking of coming home. The pets are connected to their owners through some psychic medium that science has yet to be able to explain. This also has something to do with "subtle bodies".

* East German scientists weighed dying patients just before and immediately after death. In case after case there was a weight loss of precisely 1/3000th of an ounce. The conclusion they came to: this is the weight of the human soul and it has been detected leaving the body.

The man presenting these cited examples in his work and lecture claims a masters in physics from Cincinnati State and a doctorate in biophysics from The Pennsylvania State University. I was appalled. I raised a question, asking if he felt it would be possible to design experiments in the future that would not be subject to The Backster Effect (a bias error in experiments based on the faulty plant experiment that is taught in every basic university intro lab course) and he asked what I was talking about. After explaining, the response I got was that he was not "that kind of researcher" and noted that clearly some people are "not going to believe what they don't want to". Oh, the irony.

The following week after the guest lecturer had gone, we were asked what we thought of his work. I responded I was disappointed that he didn't check his sources and pointed out that the article about the weight of the human soul that he cited from a magazine published in 1993 was originally published as the front page article of The Weekly World News in 1988 and is clearly fictional. Going on our professor's suggestion that we heavily check publisher credentials, I pointed out to the grad student teaching this week that the publisher had only published one book and found it an interesting coincidence that the address listed for the publisher happened to match the author's residential address. The speaker also isn't the primary (or even secondary) author in any published material other than that book in the past twenty years.

This did not make me popular in class.

This recent session, we watched the movie "What The Bleep Do We Know?!" which, along with valid information about the bizarre field of quantum physics, called in some amazing data about human thought affecting freezing water and how a group of people meditating lowered the crime rate in Washington DC.

A couple other students also pointed out the pseudoscience and bad data, but the surprising reaction of much of the class is that people shouldn't be questioning the material being presented -- those that question it are quickly identified as people with closed minds. One student even pointed out that if we can't trust the information being presented, then how can anyone trust the contradicting information from a skeptic? Under their breath, a student behind me commented that "there is always one of these guys in every class". (this geology major had earlier confessed to me he uses dowsing to locate things underground and fully believes it, no matter what research has told him)

While my intention is not to dismiss the overall idea of what is being presented, I have to ask if it is right for me to point out what mainstream science doesn't agree with these little factoids that are woven into the material to grab the interest of students. I don't believe any of the presentations are being intentionally dishonest. Am I not being open minded enough to see that people believing in these "experiments" are relying on just as much faith as the rest of the religious beliefs being described?

[Griff]

The speaker was the one that tried to interject science into religion, it is up to him to defend his position. You gave him what he deserved. Do you have grad students running a lot of your classes?

[SteveDallas]

I don't know that I'd necessarily try to take down the speaker. I assume that the point of having him in a World Religions course is to have an example of contemporary New Age-y spirituality stuff.

But I'm a bit unclear about what you're saying about the students... are they saying they believe all the stuff he presented? Or are they just saying it should be accepted at face value as an example of what other people believe?

B) presumably ties in to the point of the course, though I'd like to see some critical thinking in action.

If the answer is A) and they brought in a Buddhist to talk about their personal experience of Buddhism, would these students all become Buddhists on the grounds that they are obligated to personally accept whatever a speaker in the class says?

[xoxoxoBruce]

You did the right thing. Always question anything the school presents, after all, isn't part of formal education learning to question?

Oh, and be thankful it was religion class and not science.

[diggingdeeper]

Kitsune,

Great for you for having the ability to question and speak your mind!!

Keep up the fine work! You are a fine example of an open mind, but one which does not let their brains fall out!1

"A couple other students also pointed out the pseudoscience and bad data, but the surprising reaction of much of the class is that people shouldn't be questioning the material being presented -- those that question it are quickly identified as people with closed minds."


Extremely interesting and telling observation. In my opinion, this was the main thrust of the films concepts. That if one does not entertain them then they have 'created a reality" where they cannot exist. You have seen through the hogwash and yet the majority of your fellow students have not. Why do you think that is. There is much on the net with regard to the film and its inceptions (some of it by me) that point to the bogus science, misleading claims and in some cases out and out misrepresentations. Google what the bleep, fraud, bad science, dr. david albert, cult.

I am curious how the film got to a world religions class??? Did they let you know in advance that the filmmakers were members of a group called ramthas, school of enlightenment?? Which is led by a purported channeledd edntity from lemuria who is over 35,000 years old??? i would be interested in hearing whatever the case may be.

In any event, Keep on digging and asking the tough questions!!!


Thanks or the space and place

Still digging

[xoxoxoBruce]

Welcome to the Cellar, diggingdeeper

[Mockingbird]

There's a lot to cover in your post, so forgive me if I dart from one thing to another.

First off, you did the proper thing in questioning the material that was being presented to you. I've taken a few classes similar to this and from my experience it's much less about learning about world religions or schools of thought as it is a podium for speakers to toss ideas at you and see what sticks. To any rational person, it can be pretty frustrating to hear an argument for something so life altering with so little evidence. Also, this may be my ignorance on the subject but I was under the impression that while we know about the existence of dark matter/dark energy the scientific community knows next to nothing about it. Anyone proclaiming to already have some sort of idea of its role throws their credibility into question instantly. I mean, the stuff can only be measured with very precise instruments and we sort of found out about it by chance, this guy is saying that already he thinks it has something to do with my pet knowing when I come home?

I wonder who screens those people?

Anyway, I wouldn't worry about appearing close minded. Anyone quick enough to judge someone as close minded without a mountain of proof probably has a tendency to try to fit people into categories as quickly as possible so they don't have to interact with the real person and can treat them as a stereotype instead. With that said, I would imagine that the rest of your classmates are probably lapping all of the new age claptrap up, because it provides easy answers that they don't have to think about or question. I may be being hypocritical in making a flash judgment like that, but I've dealt with similar folks before and I believe this may be the case.

From here on, I would just sit and enjoy the players on the stage. You've already raised a rational objection and it seems like the majority overruled you, so while you may have to sit and listen to it to get your college credit, feel secure in the fact that you certainly don't have to buy into any of it.

I hope this helps. Good luck!

[DanaC]

Well done Kitsune! That took guts, to speak out. I'd like to second what Mockingbird just said. Sit back, get the credit, don't end up fighting the entire class every week:P

Do you have a personal tutor at college? Someone who sees to overall advice and direction rather than class specific? If you do, and it's someone you trust, it might be worth mentioning your experience of the lecture. I don't mean kicking up a stink and making a formal complaint; maybe expression of puzzlement as to why that type of lecture is acceptable.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Why wouldn't it be acceptable? College is where you learn to think about what is presented and question it's validity. I mean this isn't science or math, it's World religions, and exposure to, is their goal.

I see the problem as, not the school, or the lecturer, but his classmates' lack of reasoning skills and gullibility.

I see the problem as, not the school, or the lecturer, but his classmates' lack of reasoning skills and gullibility.

"Men willingly believe what they wish."
Julius Caesar, "De Bello Gallico", III, 18

The Eagle suffers little birds to sing.
Titus Andronicus, A4, s4

[toranokaze]

A wise man always has more questions than answers.

On another note I have hear about that plant thing before and from what I understand it has to do with reaction of the plant from compounds that released from the skin.

If you are going to be a skeptic and question what you hear at face-value, get used to having the plebeians bitch... it is a sign you are doing the right thing.

[Razzmatazz13]

They disproved that plant thing on mythbusters...

[xoxoxoBruce]

Mythbusters = pseudoscience