Deepak Chopra Is A Fraud

[Solitary]

From the internet:

Yesterday, I watched the ABC Nightline debate between Sam Harris and Deepak Chopra featuring Michael Shermer and some crazy lady. The subject of the debate was whether or not God has a future. In reality, the real debate was whether or not Deepak Chopra is trying to be the next L. Ron Hubbard.

Many times during the debate, Chopra made statements of fact which were not actually facts. When called out on these assertions, he usually took the opportunity to spout off made up terminology presumably from his books. He was pretty quick with it too. At one point Sam Harris asked him how he defines God and before Harris could even finish, Chopra was rattling off his three word phrase which spelled the an acronym G.O.D.

During another part of the debate, Harris talked about how most scientists are quick to hedge their statements because "they are desperate to avoid public embarrassment" if presented with opposing information. Chopra at this point made an interesting comment: "If I was worried about being embarrassed I wouldn't be influencing the people that I am influencing."

Like I said, this is a very interesting statement. Chopra is trying to say that he puts his opinions out there without regard because he is somehow brave or something. But what he seems to be saying to me is that his goal is to influence people and the way to do that is to make bold statements without worrying about being wrong. The way I see it, Chopra is trying to be the leader of a new religion complete with its own terminology.

Unlike other cult leaders, Deepak Chopra doesn't seem to have a coherent system of belief. Instead, he takes a little bit of science, a little bit of old school religion, a little bit of new age mysticism and throws it out there and sees what sticks.

"The spirit energy of the protons powers our souls to bring us closer to the Universe." I just made that up and yet to some people that statement is profoundly informative. In reality it is a meaningless string of words thrown together by my Deepak Chopra phrase generator.

To help support my opinion of Deepak Chopra incoherent system of science, religion, and mysticism I give you these Nightline debates. Not long ago, Chopra was on the side of reason (sort of) against wacko fundamentalists in the debate: Does Satan Exist? There too, he was able to use his patented phrase generator to rattle off more meaningless dibble.

There is no doubt that in this current debate, Deepak Chopra dominated the discourse. So much so that Sam Harris had to ask him to "dial it down a little" and told him that he has already talked for awhile. Harris even used his signature line, "You have put a lot on the table." Even the moderator, Dan Harris, had to ask Deepak to shut up on a few occasions. Still Chopra interrupted everyone and used every opportunity to spout his nonsense.

I'd like to see Deepak Chopra and Old Seer debate.  :shock:   :rollin:  Solitary

[mykcob4]

From the internet:

Yesterday, I watched the ABC Nightline debate between Sam Harris and Deepak Chopra featuring Michael Shermer and some crazy lady. The subject of the debate was whether or not God has a future. In reality, the real debate was whether or not Deepak Chopra is trying to be the next L. Ron Hubbard.

Many times during the debate, Chopra made statements of fact which were not actually facts. When called out on these assertions, he usually took the opportunity to spout off made up terminology presumably from his books. He was pretty quick with it too. At one point Sam Harris asked him how he defines God and before Harris could even finish, Chopra was rattling off his three word phrase which spelled the an acronym G.O.D.

During another part of the debate, Harris talked about how most scientists are quick to hedge their statements because "they are desperate to avoid public embarrassment" if presented with opposing information. Chopra at this point made an interesting comment: "If I was worried about being embarrassed I wouldn't be influencing the people that I am influencing."

Like I said, this is a very interesting statement. Chopra is trying to say that he puts his opinions out there without regard because he is somehow brave or something. But what he seems to be saying to me is that his goal is to influence people and the way to do that is to make bold statements without worrying about being wrong. The way I see it, Chopra is trying to be the leader of a new religion complete with its own terminology.

Unlike other cult leaders, Deepak Chopra doesn't seem to have a coherent system of belief. Instead, he takes a little bit of science, a little bit of old school religion, a little bit of new age mysticism and throws it out there and sees what sticks.

"The spirit energy of the protons powers our souls to bring us closer to the Universe." I just made that up and yet to some people that statement is profoundly informative. In reality it is a meaningless string of words thrown together by my Deepak Chopra phrase generator.

To help support my opinion of Deepak Chopra incoherent system of science, religion, and mysticism I give you these Nightline debates. Not long ago, Chopra was on the side of reason (sort of) against wacko fundamentalists in the debate: Does Satan Exist? There too, he was able to use his patented phrase generator to rattle off more meaningless dibble.

There is no doubt that in this current debate, Deepak Chopra dominated the discourse. So much so that Sam Harris had to ask him to "dial it down a little" and told him that he has already talked for awhile. Harris even used his signature line, "You have put a lot on the table." Even the moderator, Dan Harris, had to ask Deepak to shut up on a few occasions. Still Chopra interrupted everyone and used every opportunity to spout his nonsense.

I'd like to see Deepak Chopra and Old Seer debate.  :shock:   :rollin:  Solitary

It sounds JUST like the nonsense that Old Seer tried on the forum. I mean EXACTLY the same tactic.
The G.O.D. stuff is just like the Smurf ADAM isn't it?

[WitchSabrina]

:rollin:  :rollin:   yep OldSeer  Exactly  :rollin:  :rollin:

[Jason78]

Deepak Chopra Is A Fraud

Well that's just stating the bleedin' obvious isn't it?

[Hijiri Byakuren]

Makes me wonder if maybe he is Old Seer, if the bullshit they spout is so similar.

[WitchSabrina]

Deepak Chopra Is A Fraud

Well that's just stating the bleedin' obvious isn't it?

Reminds me of the old:
'Thank you Captain Obvious!'  

 :rollin:

[WitchSabrina]

Deepak Chopra Is A Fraud

Well that's just stating the bleedin' obvious isn't it?

Reminds me of the old:
'Thank you Captain Obvious!'  

 :rollin:

[Colanth]

During another part of the debate, Harris talked about how most scientists are quick to hedge their statements because "they are desperate to avoid public embarrassment" if presented with opposing information. Chopra at this point made an interesting comment: "If I was worried about being embarrassed I wouldn't be influencing the people that I am influencing."

Like I said, this is a very interesting statement. Chopra is trying to say that he puts his opinions out there without regard because he is somehow brave or something. But what he seems to be saying to me is that his goal is to influence people and the way to do that is to make bold statements without worrying about being wrong. The way I see it, Chopra is trying to be the leader of a new religion complete with its own terminology.

You're reading too much into it (and Chopra was being devious, because a magician doesn't reveal his tricks completely).

What he said was that people tend to believe someone who says 'is' more than they tend to believe someone who says 'seems to be' or 'might be'.  Religion says 'is', science 'hedges' (in his word) its statements.  This isn't an indictment of science, it's an indictment of education.  Chopra is just saying that he knows how to take advantage of the fact that the American public is woefully uneducated (at least in the technique of logical thinking).  So not only is he a fraud, he's admitting to being a fraud - to those who understand what he's saying.

[Solitary]

During another part of the debate, Harris talked about how most scientists are quick to hedge their statements because "they are desperate to avoid public embarrassment" if presented with opposing information. Chopra at this point made an interesting comment: "If I was worried about being embarrassed I wouldn't be influencing the people that I am influencing."

Like I said, this is a very interesting statement. Chopra is trying to say that he puts his opinions out there without regard because he is somehow brave or something. But what he seems to be saying to me is that his goal is to influence people and the way to do that is to make bold statements without worrying about being wrong. The way I see it, Chopra is trying to be the leader of a new religion complete with its own terminology.

You're reading too much into it (and Chopra was being devious, because a magician doesn't reveal his tricks completely).

What he said was that people tend to believe someone who says 'is' more than they tend to believe someone who says 'seems to be' or 'might be'.  Religion says 'is', science 'hedges' (in his word) its statements.  This isn't an indictment of science, it's an indictment of education.  Chopra is just saying that he knows how to take advantage of the fact that the American public is woefully uneducated (at least in the technique of logical thinking).  So not only is he a fraud, he's admitting to being a fraud - to those who understand what he's saying.

Agree! I understand what Deepak Chopra was saying. I did say that was from the internet and therefore not necessarily my opinion. Solitary

[Colanth]

I did say that was from the internet and therefore not necessarily my opinion. Solitary

You make it difficult to tell.  You should use the Quote tag to make it easier for us to see what you're quoting.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

[LikelyToBreak]

He's not all bad.  Just mostly.  

I bought his game for my computer to learn how to breath to help me with my panic disorder.  It was cheaper than a real biomonitor.  And it did help me some.  No one is all bad.  Even Adolph Hitler had some good qualities.  He did push for the Volkswagen, which was Germany's answer to the Model T.  

I read one of his books, it was about Merlin.  It did give me some new ideas about how to perceive the world.  But, I can't really recommend it.  Like people, it was not all bad.  But, it wasn't that good either.

Now it seems he has thrown in with the new age religious movement.  He is more out there, then he seemed before.

[Solitary]

I did say that was from the internet and therefore not necessarily my opinion. Solitary

You make it difficult to tell.  You should use the Quote tag to make it easier for us to see what you're quoting.

From the internet:

You couldn't see that without it being a quote?  Solitary

[Colanth]

From the internet:

You couldn't see that without it being a quote?

When it's followed by a few paragraphs from the internet, then a few paragraphs of your own words, we can't tell which is which.  That's one of the reasons for the Quote button.

[the_antithesis]