what the bleep do we know?

[goldisheavy]

I don't think the film is bad at all. However, I would say it is less than ideal. The reason for that is because it's not good to borrow concepts from science without understanding the meaning of those concepts, and then use those concepts to give your film an aura of scientific validity. That's the problem.

 

The problem is that, first, science itself is bogus, but nobody wants to challenge the assumptions that science is based on, except guys like Nagarjuna, who are dead. Pretty much no modern person wants to challenge science. The way that science can and should be challenged is in philosophy, because science does yield practical results! It's the same issue going the other way too. Spiritual practice also yields results and cannot be challenged in terms of practical application. But it CAN and should be challenged philosophically. Unfortunately people like James Randi don't get it. Oh well.

 

There are not that many contemplators and real philosophers in this world. Most people are eager to just practice, practice, practice and don't want to contemplate or think about anything. People want to get 1, 2, 3 instructions and just follow them. That's the majority mindset. If you get your VCR or DVR, do you REALLY care how it works? Right? You just wanna know, what button do I push to get results, NOW, NOW, hell, YESTERDAY! I want this done yesterday. We are impatient. We want results. We don't care about understanding at all.

 

This attitude dominates spirituality as well. In spirituality people focus on meditation, because people want results. They want to push that button and make things happen. They want meditative experiences. They want juice. They can't be bothered to reflect. To slow down. To pause. To breathe slowly. No, we have to meditate and get that energy going NOW, ASAP. People keep looking for shortcuts, and external validations.

 

This attitude is the result of movies like "What the bleep do we know." It's basically a dim witted movie with good intentions. It's a movie made by someone who doesn't REALLY think much, but just likes to shoot from the hip, and who wants things done yesterday. It's not bad though. It is inspiring to many people. It has some good questions and ideas in it, but it is put together in a careless manner and it's definitely inconsiderate to scientists.

 

It would be like physicists using the concept of crucifixion to talk about matter/anti-matter interactions in a way that's not really related to the crucifixion of the Bible, in order to get an aura of Biblical legitimacy for the study of physics. We would all laugh at that, wouldn't we? It would be stupid. So when this happens in reverse, it's equally stupid.

[Martial Development]

Actually, I think this movie reflects people's distaste for meditative practice, and preference for (shallow) intellectual explorations over experience. They don't want the life, so much as the lifestyle.

 

I have found that most Americans are very uncomfortable following simple and direct meditation instructions, unless they are accompanied by a large dose of theoretical explanation.

[Owledge]

I have found that most Americans are very uncomfortable following simple and direct meditation instructions, unless they are accompanied by a large dose of theoretical explanation.

That might be just being careful of not being mentally manipulated. Wanting to know, to understand what you're doing with your body and brain before you do it.