(This second item is especially interesting--one of the physicists who was interviewed states that he spent 4 or 5 hours teaching quantum physics to the producers of What the Bleep only to have them mis--represent what he told them.)
[i:5028676489]What the Bleep [/i:5028676489]was produced by people involved with the Ramtha School of Enlightenment. Here are links with info about this group if you're excited about this film or someone you care about is all fired up about it.
What the film apparently does is use some tintillating 'sexy' topics derived from science which are fashionable but extremely complicated. The film uses scraps of material derived from science to support assertions that cannot be supported at this time by science.
Science is like baseball. You have to play by a set of rules otherwise it stops being science and becomes a wish fulfillment exercise.
One of the rules in science is, whenever possible you test using double blind research designs--where neither subject nor researcher know what protocols are being used. That way the researchers own biases and ambitions will not affect how the experiment is conducted.
Someone speculated that the greatest scientific breakthrough of the 20th Century was the double blind research design.
We can make a comarison between science and a sport like baseball. Liek science, we must play by the rules of baseball or the encounter isnt a baseball game. You can have uniforms, be in a famous stadium, with bats and balls and a Hall of Fame team, but unless played by the rules, it will not be a true baseball game, just a an impersonation.
To someone unfamiliar with the game, it will [i:5028676489]look [/i:5028676489]like a baseball game, and they'll be taken in. But the people who know the rules of baseball would soon see that its not a genuine baseball game--that appearance is not reality. They'd probably demand their money back and start a riot, God bless 'em.
[i:5028676489]What the Bleep [/i:5028676489]wears the costume of science but doesnt go by the rules of science--while surfing on the trust and respect this culture has given to science. We trust science and scientists because they're known to follow rules and produce information that reliable.
When the rules of science are violated, either by scientists themselves or by anyone in the media who mis-represents scientific findings, this does a disservice to science, and to the general public.
The sense of wonder produced by the film may come at the cost of undermining adult, critical thinking. Your sense of wonder and delight becomes subtly linked to the notion that there is no single, objective reality--no single truth. Its the release that comes from allowing oneself to become pleasantly intoxicated, where normal cognitive boundaries are loosened up.
As long as we enjoy this sense of wonder temporarily, in the movie theatre, and then allow the buzz to subside and resume our recollection of adult ethics and scientific reasoning, thats OK, though its worth keeping in mind that one of the physicists who was interviewed in the film has gone on record saying his information was mis-represented.
The hazard comes if someone should ever use [i:5028676489]What the Bleep's [/i:5028676489] pleasant, fuzzy vacation from critical thinking as part of a process to loosen people up and then sell them a larger agenda that isnt good for them--and especially if they loosen people up without giving any indication that they have an agenda up their sleeves that will be slipped into the mix when normal vigilence is disabled after watching [i:5028676489]What the Bleep?[/i:5028676489]
What the Bleep uses elements from science to tintillate us into a feeling of wonder, while at the same time rejecting the rules that govern science and the alert, disciplined state of mind one needs to [i:5028676489]function as [/i:5028676489]a scientist. The wonder may feel so delicious that many people will cling to it, and resent it if any attempt is made to warn them that the film engenders wonder at the cost of mis-representing science.
A film like Mel Gibsons [i:5028676489]'The Passion of the Christ' [/i:5028676489]could readily be used to instill emotional exhaustion and guilt, which could then be used by a coercive group or church as part of an indoctrination process.
A film like [i:5028676489]What the Bleep [/i:5028676489]which instills wonder and uses seemingly scientific information to undermine the rules which govern genuine scientific research, and instead suggests that truth is subjective--could someday used to support a different but no less effective indoctrination process.