“No, once he decided to publish his experience and profit from it, his experience became part of the public domain. He could have kept it to himself, but he chose not to. To criticize others for commenting on what Alexander has publicly disseminated--in Newsweek no less--is perfectly appropriate. The author is not dismissing Alexander either. He is simply raising questions about the method and evidence Alexander provides. Why is that so wrong? Should we, instead, automatically believe "as gospel" (pun intended) everything people say that has to do with the afterlife?”
“I think any "good skeptic" would be perfectly willing to accept the existence of an afterlife if sufficient proof could be presented. That's the rub. Alexander may be "uniquely qualified" to comment on his experiences, but that, by itself, doesn't make him right. Einstein was wrong about a lot of things, yet he was undoubtedly one of the greatest minds the planet has ever had.
The crux of the article was that Alexander may have presented evidence of an afterlife, but he definitely did not provide proof. His evidence, moreover, was possibly biased. Ultimately, that is all the author is arguing.
Finally, while scientism may be a religion, science is not.”
“To you they are silly toys, but obviously there is a huge demand for these products. The fact they can't do the stuff you mention is basically irrelevant: they obviously do what people want them to do. People like the form factor compared to a laptop--for many, that is enough. I have Macbook Air, but I would still like an ipad. I agree, though, that on my list of priorities, the ipad is not at the top because it isn't a "productivity tool," but mostly (albeit not completely) an entertainment tool.”
greyW on Aug 22, 2011 at 06:04:08
“Uh, yeah...a toy. As he said. Newsflash: toy makers make money too.”