New Age Spiritual Woo Woo

New Age Spiritual Woo Woo

╔═╦╗╔╦╗╔═╦═╦╦╦╦╗╔═╗ ║╚╣║║║╚╣╚╣╔╣╔╣║╚╣═╣ ╠╗║╚╝║║╠╗║╚╣║║║║║═╣ ╚═╩══╩═╩═╩═╩╝╚╩═╩═╝ woo-woo Woo-woo (or just plain woo) refers to ideas considered irrational or based on extremely flimsy evidence or that appeal to mysterious occult forces or powers. Here’s a dictionary definition of woo-woo: adj. concerned with emotions, mysticism, or spiritualism; other than rational or scientific; mysterious; new agey. Also n., a person who has mystical or new age beliefs. When used by skeptics, woo-woo is a derogatory and dismissive term used to refer to beliefs one considers nonsense or to a person who holds such beliefs. Sometimes woo-woo is used by skeptics as a synonym for pseudoscience, true-believer, or quackery. But mostly the term is used for its emotive content and is an emotive synonym for such terms as nonsense, irrational, nutter, nut, or crazy. For example: “But the woo-woo faction has adopted the word “organic” to apply only to a plant grown without the use of anything but water and faith.”* I think love is the one thing that should remain firmly in the realm of the woo-woo.* The National Institutes of Health offered a course in feng shui, which prompted James Randi to write of woo-woo at the NIH. …the woo-woos … are more comfortable being ignorant of reality.*

  1. neoman121Dec 12, 2012

    It seems to me that he’s forgetting that a LITTLE bit of the atom IS material… :/

  2. Skankhair333Dec 12, 2012

    I almost feel bad for Deepak. He was a laughing stock at that debate. But then I remember that he is a liar, a crook, and a con man. He deserves far worse than public embarrassment.

  3. Skankhair333Dec 12, 2012

    How is being an ignorant bigot working out for you? Doesn’t look like it is going well.

  4. heretichickDec 12, 2012

    @SaganAppreciationSoc yeah, but…he, like a lot of Indian mystic/guru/yogi types need to stop abusing science, especially physics, it’s just as insidious as creationisms rejection of the solid fact of evolution, saying nothing of their ridiculous claims of being able to teach supernatural abilities to yoke people out of cash.

  5. roqsandaDec 12, 2012

    SAM HARRIS is a SELF-PROFLIGATING FAGGOT, who married a FAGGOT~

  6. SaganAppreciationSocDec 12, 2012

    Deepok is a nice guy, but he really doesn’t understand physics.

  7. doubtsDec 12, 2012

    Try David Bohm .. not many would argue with him.. Or Max Planck even .

  8. PascalsWager5Dec 12, 2012

    “Those who know that they are profound strive for clariry. Those who would like to seem profound strive for obscurity” (Nietzsche, The Gay Science)

  9. CommitToFocusDec 12, 2012

    wooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!

  10. PascalsWager5Dec 12, 2012

    I think that some of his errors were pointed out in the clip. It’s difficult to prove non-intelligible comments as “wrong” as such. You can point out that they are non-intelligible. Which is what the people in this clip were doing. Try and formulate what he said in such a way that it makes sense. Maybe start with “consciousness is a superposition of possiblities” Then you can assess it. Unintelligibility doesn’t mean deep. Open-minded doesn’t mean believe everything that’s thrown at you.

  11. PascalsWager5Dec 12, 2012

    Deepak is so non-rigorous, it’s embarrassing. The guy in the red shirt owned him.

  12. bhank21Dec 12, 2012

    i’d like to watch this whole “debate”.

  13. minimalist34Dec 12, 2012

    this is a rhetorical trap, deepak chopra presents theories/arguements that are unfalsifiable therefore what he says is tautological, it cannot be accepted in the scientific arena. In the mystic arena fine. But when using scientific rhetoric to try and fool scientists is just an utter failure

  14. Randy GoffDec 12, 2012

    It is my understanding that real scientists believe what they can prove. Can you prove that Chopra is wrong? If you can’t, why are you laughing? Why don’t you go back to your work until you have definitive facts to back up your derision? I challenge anyone to come up with definitive evidence. Unless you can do that, perhaps we should be laughing at you. Cal Tech – please present what you have.

  15. MrJohndlDec 12, 2012

    LOL what a load of woo woo crap!! Sam destroys him hahahaha.

  16. qwyzlDec 12, 2012

    how 2 figure if 1 is “pitching woo” – & i don’t mean in the romantic sense – does this person write & publish books? does this person record dvd’s, movies, go on teleivised inter views? does this person do “lecture tours”? & does this person, all the while they do these things, MAKE MONEY? then they’re PITCHING WOO. if they’re sitting in front of you while wearing a thousand dollar suit, if they arrive in a limousine, if they live in a mansion – you’re being duped in 2 believing NON SENSE.

  17. Incognitoification1Dec 13, 2012

    Super-Conspiracy theories, unfounded speculation, magical woo, etc, appear to be gathering steady ground in society.

    Charlatans like David Icke and Deepak Chopra are taken seriously by more people than ever before, well, from what I’ve personally observed.

    Reason and Empiricism is under attack.

  18. 00rangeDec 13, 2012

    Pretty much.

  19. Seán O'NilbudDec 13, 2012

    @Skolinkenlot Actually you’re just stupid.

  20. cutes22Dec 13, 2012

    LMAO, look at Sam’s face at 1:36 Thought bubble…(what is this dumbf*** babbling about?)

  21. Seán O'NilbudDec 13, 2012

    Ahh I love it, I’ve watched this a few times now. It’s the intellectual equivalent of a headbutt. Deepak is spitting out broken teeth at the end. Deepak attempts to divide the universe by 0 and gets the answer infinity but if you divide anything by 0 you get the same answer. To appeal to the infinite is to embrace nothing.

  22. Seán O'NilbudDec 13, 2012

    I’ll stop crying so.

Leave a Reply


*