Comments on: Deep Nonsense from Deepak

By: Science-Based Medicine » The Huffington Post’s War on Medical Science: A Brief History

Mon, 04 May 2009 11:01:47 +0000

[...] and “prevention.” On the HuffPo, he has laid down all sorts of nonsense about dualism, “intelligent design” creationism, universal consciousness, and “quantum” [...]

By: Deepak on the Blower | Skeptical Acid

Deepak on the Blower | Skeptical Acid — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 18:39:33 +0000

[...] Deepak Chopra was on the Adam Corolla show this past week. Listen to his mellifluous voice explain that Western medicine is useful because it let’s you know everything about the human body, and makes you a good technician, but it doesn’t necessarily make you a healer, because you know nothing about the spirit. It’s not some woo-woo stuff out there; it’s still very science-based. [...]

By: NeuroLogica Blog » The Mind-Brain Problem - A Creationist Rebuttal

NeuroLogica Blog » The Mind-Brain Problem - A Creationist Rebuttal — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:30:54 +0000

[...] favorite creationist neurosurgeon, Dr. Michael Egnor, has written a rebuttal to my previous post criticizing the dualism of Deepak Chopra. His rebuttal is very revealing about the disconnect [...]

By: mattdick

mattdick — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:16:18 +0000

NYCSkeptic says:

“I still have such difficulty understanding how someone with a relatively impressive medical career … could have turned into such a pseudoscientist.”

Medicine is an interesting beast. We have doctors who get a medical degree who are legitimate scientists. We also get doctors who are practitioners — excellently trained, well-qualified doctors, but these are not scientists.

I don’t know how to tell the difference other than by getting into a fairly detailed conversation — both kinds of doctors believe their scientists.

Chopra is clearly non-scientific, and even further he’s a post-modern, self-help scamming Oprah-guest.

By: Science After Sunclipse

Science After Sunclipse — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:05:13 +0000

SUSY QM 2: Shape Invariance…

After a while, you just get tired. An honest science blogger can only handle so much science jargon thrown around without meaning, only a limited amount of Choprawoo and quantum flapdoodle. How long can anyone with integrity, curiosity and a dose of …

By: pmosier

pmosier — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:38:29 +0000

Does Dr. Chopra not see any inconsistency in his “evidence” (even if we accept it at face value)? (A) The mind can will the brain to do whatever it wants to do, even bypass damaged regions; (B) this damage bypass happens when a technological device (“Brain Port”) is applied to the patient.

Message for Dr. Chopra (although I doubt he will ever read this): if the mind was able to do all this, separate from the brain, why is the “Brain Port” device even necessary? Can’t the mind just “will” the new neuron pathways into existence? No? Well then, your anecdote seems to belie your claims regarding the power of the mind over the brain. But don’t worry. The “Sheeple” that buy your books will not likely have mind/brains sharp enough to notice the problems in your feel-good spiel.

By: DLC

DLC — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 01:41:19 +0000

Never having met a mind that existed without a brain I’ll stick to being skeptical of Chopra. Call me odd.
I’m reminded of the movie “Fright Night” where the vampire tells the would-be vampire hunter : “You have to have Faith for that to work.” It’s the same thing with Deepak Chopra. You have to make a leap of faith to believe in his woo.

By: happy humanist

happy humanist — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 22:36:06 +0000

Thanks, Steve.

I’m a regular reader and poster at HuffPo, so am familiar with Chopra’s woo. What is very troubling is dealing with the sympathetic posters–the ones who believe in dualism and who stubbornly refuse to see that “brain is mind.” It’s like beating my head against a wall–or like that “debate” with Neal Adams!! I didn’t even try to read this recent blog. I knew what I would find.

Want a laugh? Look at the comments section of the Chopra essays. Then cry.

By: Roy Niles

Roy Niles — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 22:21:40 +0000

If I’m not mistaken, Deepak is from the Vedanta school of philosophy, described on one site as: “Part of the Hindu scriptures, Vedanta, literally meaning that which comes after the Vedas, is one of the most ancient philosophies of the world. It’s basic tenet lies in affirming the oneness of existence, the divinity of the soul, and the harmony of religions.”
Also the Bhagavad_Gita seems to be his “bible.”

Everything he “learns” from science has to be squeezed and molded to fit with that religious philosophy (or religosophy if you will).

it would be too much to expect that he would instead listen to reason and adapt his philosophy to fit in a little more with advances in science .

By: eiskrystal

eiskrystal — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 21:12:25 +0000

I learnt some things about earth history from your “discussions” with Neal Adams even when he became a capslock basher. Deepak however is just embarrassing. How can anyone take that sappy, drippy feelgood rubbish seriously?
It’s a watered down “the secret”. Nothing more.