Turgon said:
13 Twirling Triskeles said:
Sheldrake: Morphic resonance is the influence of previous structures of activity on subsequent similar structures of activity organized by morphic fields. It enables memories to pass across both space and time from the past. The greater the similarity, the greater the influence of morphic resonance. What this means is that all self-organizing systems, such as molecules, crystals, cells, plants, animals and animal societies, have a collective memory on which each individual draws and to which it contributes. In its most general sense this hypothesis implies that the so-called laws of nature are more like habits.
* * * * *
Even this explanation doesn't much help me understand what Sheldrake is describing.
Okay, let's use a hypothetical situation that would tie into Sheldrake's theory of morphic resonance. Say you have monkey's living on an island isolated from all other monkeys of their kind. One of them on this isolated island spends a lot of time and energy trying to discover how to make fire. He is successful at it, but it's an unrefined method that needs more work. When monkey's of later generations on this island attempt to make fire, because of morphic resonance (they are the same species as the original monkey) they instinctively remember the experiences of this original monkey because his memories and knowledge were added to all monkeys collective memory, which therefore makes it easier for later generations to tap into this knowledge and learn how to not only make fire, but refine the method.
So when Sheldrake says something like this
What this means is that all self-organizing systems, such as molecules, crystals, cells, plants, animals and animal societies, have a collective memory on which each individual draws and to which it contributes.
It enables memories to pass across both space and time from the past.
These memories of making fire will extend past the isolated island to monkeys of similar species all across the globe who have never even come into contact with them before, because they are all connected to the same collective memory through resonance.
Hopefully this makes sense.
Aloha
Turgon --
Thank you so much for that explanation. It now makes perfect sense to me when you refer to that 100th Monkey experiment. I read that book many many years ago (probably 1994 I think) and I understood that concept easily. (At least I "think" I did.)
Somehow when scientists break the invisible world down into molecules and matter, whatever I do "seem" to understand warps into nonsense and throws me into confusion. To me, the paranormal and spiritual & psychological worlds are mostly self-evident. It's when the materialists need to "prove" all this stuff with replicable physical tests they can measure, calculate, and "reduce"(?) to, or explicate with, mathematical formulas that I get lost in the jungle.
I see that most of us, including myself, are happy to see science "proving" that something does indeed exist using their scientific methods. It's necessary for lots of reasons. It's just that it seems to me as if science (at least as it is being "practiced" now under the auspices of the PTB authoritarian types) is, and has always been, playing a game of "catch-up" with the meta-physically oriented. Which is not to say that the meta-physicians aren't sometimes a lot of speculative whackos as well. It's not as if one group is the white hats and the other is the black hats. They both include members who play both roles -- which we've seen right here on SOTT.net and the Forum (See the threads about the metaphysical community's New Age Cointelpro agents and proselytizers. -- Speaking of which -- when I did a spell-check just now, it wanted to change "Morphic" to "Orphic".) :)
It's
less the fault of the scientists or materialists and
more the fault of my own lack of IQ I suspect. I just don't have a very highly developed Lower Intellectual Center (much less a Higher Intellectual Center) so somehow I grok information with some other type of understanding -- if one could even call it "understanding". I doubt that it's even "intuition" either. Possibly it's just childhood programming based on religious upbringing that there is an "invisible" world that exists and just because we cannot hear, see, touch, taste, or "feel" these phenomena emotionally doesn't preclude the possibility that it exists.
Whatever the reason, I had/have less difficulty incorporating the 100th Monkey experiment into my world view based on the information I read about how the people observed what happened on the island in question. As I recall the story, it was based on observing some young monkeys playing around in a stream with yams and discovering they could wash the yams in the water. Prior to that, the monkeys had always eaten the yams while still covered in dirt.
These young monkeys then taught the older monkeys to wash yams too. Eventually, all the monkeys on the island were washing their yams. Which wouldn't really be such a far-fetched possibility. The show-stopper, however, occurred when they subsequently noticed that monkeys on all the other islands also took up the habit -- and there was no way the monkeys on the original island could have transferred that information to monkeys on the other islands because there was no way for them to physically travel to any of the other islands.
At any rate, the article about Morphogenic Fields which I quoted on Page 21, Reply #307, (see below quote), does refer to the 100th Monkey syndrome (bolded). When I read that, I thought, oh right. I understand that reference. But the rest of the article actually threw me into more confusion and I could not connect what it was saying with what I understood about the 100th Monkey experiment.
So it seems as if I could grok that something indeed happened, that I was open to the possibility and probability of it indeed happening, and had no trouble "buying" that it indeed did happen.
Then here comes Morphogenic Fields theory to explain the how and why it happened. Which is all wonderful of course, and if I really grasped the physics of it all, would delight me no end that there is a real, practical, solid, scientific explanation for this 100th Monkey syndrome based on sound science which I could use in order to mentally picture how it all works in a nuts and bolts sort of way. But since I can't grasp the physics, I can't make a mental picture, so I'm still attempting to get my little rowboat upstream without a paddle.
Maybe this is why analogies seem to help me better understand these sorts of physics concepts?
The original question I was asked was: Is telepathy sort of like Morphogenic Fields. I had heard of MF's, but since I didn't really know enough about what a Morphogenic Field was, I decided to look it up in order to see if the answer was yes, no, or maybe so that I could answer the question proposed to me. After reading through a few sites about MF's, and realizing that I couldn't understand what an MF really was, I had to respond that I simply did not have a clue if they are the same or even connected.
And even though I think I understand the 100th Monkey "syndrome" (why the author of that quote calls it a "syndrome" I'm not sure -- but I'll just leave that for the time being), the question of whether or not Morphogenic Fields are similar to or connected to telepathy I still haven't a clue. I suppose scientists will just have to run lots of tests and -- as the C's say -- "Discover." :)
Hopefully the next couple of paragraphs are not completely off-topic -- and maybe I'm seeing connections to the concept of MF's that are not really there, but here goes --
I think I recall reading somewhere long ago that humans used to ordinarily dream in black and white. Then some people began reporting that they dreamed in technicolor. Pretty soon, many many people were reporting that they too dreamed in color. Possibly it's similar to an athlete breaking some record -- eventually, many other athletes are also breaking that record. As if, once a "new" possibility becomes actualized, our "minds"(?) are more open to considering a less limiting barrier to what's possible to accomplish.
There were a couple of articles on SOTT.net which talked about "critical mass" as well. And that once an idea had reached critical mass, it would spread almost simultaneously around the planet and become an idea that most everyone was aware of.
In a similar(?) vein -- and I could be
really wrong about this -- so do feel free to correct me -- but this whole idea of "owning" my creations is sort of odd to me. In this sense only. How many times have several inventors come up with an almost identical invention in different parts of the world and none of them had any connection to each other? (I'm thinking here of the radio and electricity as examples.)
Even in my own personal world -- as a very silly illustration of this idea -- I've started wearing some really off-the-wall type of clothing or accessory -- or modified it for my own liking or convenience -- and years later, that style is all over the place. Does that mean everyone is "copying" me? NO. I don't think so at all. I think maybe these ideas are sitting around somewhere in the "idea" universe and people simply tap into them intuitively or psychically or in some other way. It has nothing to do with me. And I don't even consider that "I" created that look. I just think I picked up on some invisible frequency that caught my awareness.
And one more -- years ago I used to write a lot in my journal, and sometimes I would allow my friends to read some of my essays. A few times, one would remark that I should write it for others to read. But doing that didn't interest me in the slightest. Time would pass -- and I would buy or borrow a book from the library. Lo & behold, there was something already written by someone else that was similar to what I'd written myself. I'd laugh and say, Oh good! Someone else has done it so I don't have to. Not only that, but they've written it far better than I could ever hope to do. Yay! I'm off the hook.
What I decided was that these ideas were't really my own -- they were just floating around somewhere in the "idea" universe and lots of people could tap into them if there was a frequency match or something like that.
There's a caveat about that writing thing however. It's not as if I was writing anything earth-shattering or blazing any amazing trails into the unknown (like Laura does for instance). My stuff was pretty much about insights I'd had about whatever. Nothing really remarkable at all.
Cheers Turgon!
And now -- the quote below which references the 100th Monkey syndrome.
* * * * *
The morphogenic field is one of the most important and least understood factors of influence within our society and our global culture. It is a field of energy containing a certain frequency or resonance, created by all living species that are both visible and invisible on planet Earth. All living species, human beings, animals and plants have a consciousness and therefore an emotional field. Emotion and the energy connected to it is one of the most powerful forces of creation in existence. If you had the ability to encourage a large number of people to think and act in similar ways, a morphogenic field could be created. Have you heard of the 'Hundredth Monkey" syndrome? This is the type of effect a morphogenic field can have within a group. With enough input, the field itself creates a ripple effect that others knowingly or unknowingly, are able to tap into. If all people thought and acted in the same way, this would create a field of similarity for everyone. There are several active groups and organizations currently encouraging peace meditations and global awareness and they have the possibility of reaching a critical mass through a morphogenic field, creating a rippling effect and potentially propelling humanity into a peaceful awareness.
