A supporter of Deepak Chopra criticizes
Wikipedia's
practice in editing the page about him.
Chopra's metaphysical statements are unsupported by what is actually
known in quantum physics. They are extraordinary claims, and would
require extraordinary proofs. Proofs would entail a systematic series
of experiments that Chopra hasn't reported doing. This is
pseudoscience, and it is good that Wikipedia makes this clear.
It is also true that patients may die from using "alternative
medicine" instead of scientific medicine — Steve Jobs is perhaps
the most famous example of this, though we are arguably
better
off without him — and it is Wikipedia's responsibility to
point this out.
However, some of the practices described in the article do seem wrong
to me. Two clear examples are those about the Yoga section and the
bibliography. That's why I am posting this note.
Real scientists sometimes propose
strange
metaphysical hypotheses, but they recognize that these are
speculative and don't present them as certain truths.
I am disappointed that the article refers to Wikipedia as "open
source", thus misrepresenting the meaning of "free" in "free
encyclopedia".