Deepak Chopra vs Leonard Mlodinow

“I’ve never encountered a definition of ‘consciousness’ that I understand.”

“A superposition of possibilities.”

“Uh… I know what each of those words means…”

The concept of infinity is mathematical, not spiritual. Deepak Chopra regularly borrows scientific terms of profession and strings them together in ways that simply do not correlate with reality. He’s really quite good at pulling the wool over the eyes of the common folk, but when encountering someone with the least bit of technical training, his bluster is all too easily exposed for what it is.

It’s a shame his nonsense makes so many people feel so good about themselves. What respite they gain from the harshness of this world in his aphorisms, they pay for tenfold in their own faculties.

{advertisement}
Deepak Chopra vs Leonard Mlodinow
{advertisement}

3 thoughts on “Deepak Chopra vs Leonard Mlodinow

  1. 2

    The whole debate is worth watching. It was a lesson from Sam Harris in how to deal with blabbering loons like D-bag Chopra. Ironically, he actually warned Chopra to be careful about lecturing people about theoretical physics if you don’t have a thorough grounding in it, especially if you’re speaking to an audience at Cal Tech, because you don’t know who might be sitting in the audience. Chopra accused him of waging “scientific jihad” (exact quote) and later claimed that an example of a “non-local event” in physics is the way a pace-maker functions. That’s what Mlodinov was referring to, in case it’s not clear.

  2. 3

    After seeing this, I can only say of Chopra’s word-salad…

    “Teh Silly…It Burnz Uss!”

    Hmmm.

    I must make a new image with that as the caption, to replace the old one of a man with his brain on fire that already sees far too much use on teh interwebz.

    Chopra’s not stupid, after all, since he’s hit upon a business strategy that seems to work no matter what can be said for his intellectual authenticity.

    Good post, Jason.

Comments are closed.