The Science Delusion - Rupert Sheldrake
- Thread starter Laura
- Start date
obyvatel
The Living Force
Approaching Infinity said:
Some of these ideas emerging out of science and philosophy appear to move in the general direction of 4th Way cosmology. These jumps to new levels through complex transmutations are captured in the table of hydrogens (http://www.cassiopedia.org/glossary/Hydrogen) in 4th Way cosmology which treats all that exists as different levels of these "hydrogens". Once a certain level of "hydrogen" is reached through the transmutation process, that hydrogen cannot be reduced further but serves as the whole unit of that level.
It's a shame, but "The science delusion" is not in Spanish. However, other books of Rupert Sheldrake have been translated into Spanish as “A New Science of Life” and “Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home: And Other Unexplained Powers of Animals”
Does anyone have read them? Any recommendations?
Does anyone have read them? Any recommendations?
Orange Scorpion said:
A New Science of Life is good. That was his first book, which caused such an uproar among the scientific community. Haven't read Dogs, but it's about the experiments in telepathy he's been conducting for several years. I'd guess it would be easier reading than New Science.
thanks, AI, for the advice :)
Eva
Jedi
Brilliant, Approaching Infinity, thanks a LOT for that summary! 
I initially thought of the ascending octave successive intervals when reading Approaching Infinity's text.
With the interval(/jump?) filling "shocks" being -achieving and sustaining- the input of new information.
I doubt I have really understood all about the hydrogens though so I'm sure what you said makes more sense.
obyvatel said:
I initially thought of the ascending octave successive intervals when reading Approaching Infinity's text.
With the interval(/jump?) filling "shocks" being -achieving and sustaining- the input of new information.
I doubt I have really understood all about the hydrogens though so I'm sure what you said makes more sense.
momo
Padawan Learner
Hello,
I had the pleasure to speak with Mr. Sheldrake in 2009, when he was giving a talk here in Austria.
One of his publications fascinated me particularly: The Physics of Angels, which he wrote together with the theologist Matthew Fox.
Regarding the morphogenetic fields, he told me how he tried to set up a cooperation with the British examination boards carrying out the A-Levels. Since all students in England, Wales and Scotland do the A-Levels at the exact same time, all he asked was to put the first question last in 10 % of the samples , so he would be able to find out whether those 10% are significantly better at solving this problem because the 90%s work on that same problem just minutes before would influence the 10%.
Unfortunately (and unsurprisingly), the Boards decided not to cooperate.
What was also quite interesting to me, and what the conversation with him pointed me to, is the way many scientist mistake there profession for a religion - it is Sheldrake who got me acquainted with the crystal beard hypothesis - does anyone know if it this is really true: _http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Papers/papers/morphic/morphic1_paper.html
What made me a bit weary is that Mr. Sheldrake is into Transcendental Meditation _http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/feb/05/rupert-sheldrake-interview-science-delusion
and this film _http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1598782/ really, really made me stay far away from it.
What connects me to this whole Morphogenetic Fields Theory is that as a child, I used to be very sure that there is a layer around our globe that contains everyone and everything and everytime in shapeless form, and that anyone on the planet or elsewhere had the possibility to access this layer with their concentration.
Since I am new to "The Work" - where does it connect to it?
Thank you for input, I feel like a sponge - still quite dry, but sucking up more and more "Reality". :)
Greetings from Austria,
momo
I had the pleasure to speak with Mr. Sheldrake in 2009, when he was giving a talk here in Austria.
One of his publications fascinated me particularly: The Physics of Angels, which he wrote together with the theologist Matthew Fox.
Regarding the morphogenetic fields, he told me how he tried to set up a cooperation with the British examination boards carrying out the A-Levels. Since all students in England, Wales and Scotland do the A-Levels at the exact same time, all he asked was to put the first question last in 10 % of the samples , so he would be able to find out whether those 10% are significantly better at solving this problem because the 90%s work on that same problem just minutes before would influence the 10%.
Unfortunately (and unsurprisingly), the Boards decided not to cooperate.
What was also quite interesting to me, and what the conversation with him pointed me to, is the way many scientist mistake there profession for a religion - it is Sheldrake who got me acquainted with the crystal beard hypothesis - does anyone know if it this is really true: _http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Papers/papers/morphic/morphic1_paper.html
What made me a bit weary is that Mr. Sheldrake is into Transcendental Meditation _http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/feb/05/rupert-sheldrake-interview-science-delusion
and this film _http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1598782/ really, really made me stay far away from it.
What connects me to this whole Morphogenetic Fields Theory is that as a child, I used to be very sure that there is a layer around our globe that contains everyone and everything and everytime in shapeless form, and that anyone on the planet or elsewhere had the possibility to access this layer with their concentration.
Since I am new to "The Work" - where does it connect to it?
Thank you for input, I feel like a sponge - still quite dry, but sucking up more and more "Reality". :)
Greetings from Austria,
momo
Chapter 2
Dogma #3: "The total amount of matter and energy is always the same …"
Chapter Summary: "In the Big Bang all the matter and energy in the universe suddenly appeared from nowhere. Modern cosmology supposes that dark matter and dark energy no make up 96 percent of reality. No one knows what dark matter or energy are, how they work or how they interact with familiar forms of matter or energy. The amount of dark energy seems to be increasing as the universe expands, and the 'quintessence field' may give rise to new matter and energy, more in some places than others. [AI: I think this is weak evidence, given that Electric Universe theory pretty much debunks both the Big Bang and dark matter/energy…] The evidence for energy conservation in living organisms is weak, and there are several anomalies, like the apparent ability of some people to live without food for long periods, that suggest the existence of new forms of energy. All quantum processes are supposed to be mediated through the quantum-vacuum field, also known as the zero-point field, which is not empty but full of energy and continually gives rise to virtual photons and particles of matter. Could this energy be tapped in new technologies?" (pp. 82-3)
Not much of interest in this chapter, for me at least. There is the interesting observation, however, that the Big Bang theory was essentially "a conspiracy to shore up Christianity" ("The creation of all matter and energy in the Beginning is presupposed by the Big Bang creation story, just as it was by Rene Descartes, Robert Boyle, Isaac Newton and other scientists who wanted to make physics compatible with an initial act of creation by God"). (p. 65)
"In contrast with matter and bodies, forces and energies are not things: they are to do with processes in time." (p. 57) Even atoms are not static things, but "structures of activity … vibratory patterns of activity within fields." (p. 60)
Chapter 3
Dogma #4: "The laws of nature are fixed. …"
Chapter Summary: "The idea that the 'laws of nature' are fixed while the universe evolves is an assumption left over from pre-evolutionary cosmology. The laws may themselves evolve or, rather, be more like habits. Also, the 'fundamental constants' may be variable, and their values may not have been fixed at the instant of the Big Bang. They still seem to be varying today. There may be an inherent memory in nature. All organisms may participate in a collective memory of their kind. Crystals may crystallize the way they do because they formed that way before; the more crystals of a particular chemical arise in one place, the easier should they crystallize everywhere else on earth, and maybe throughout the universe. Evolution may be the result of an interplay between habits and creativity. New forms and patterns of organization appear spontaneously, and are subject to natural selection. Those that survive are more likely to appear again as new habits build up, and through repetition they become increasingly habitual." (p. 108)
If the universe is constantly evolving, why not the physical laws also? Laws were given attributes of God (eternal, universal) because they were seen as made by God. There's evidence that published values of 'universal constants' vary over time (fine structure constant, gravity, speed of light). They depend on laboratory measurements. Perhaps they change, or perhaps they "oscillate within fairly narrow limits, or even vary chaotically." (p. 93) How were laws imprinted at the time of the Big Bang? How are they remembered, how the universe maintained?
Some quotes of interest:
Charles Sanders Peirce: "Matter is merely mind deadened by the development of habit to the point where the breaking up of these habits is very difficult." (p. 98)
Alfred North Whitehead: "There are no natural laws. There are only temporary habits of nature." (p. 99)
"evolutionary cosmology implies the evolution of habits." (p. 99)
Morphic resonance summary:
1. Self-organizing systems including molecules, cells, tissues, organs, organisms, societies and minds are made up of nested hierarchies or holarchies of holons or morphic units. At each level the whole is more than the sum of the parts, and these parts themselves are wholes made up of parts.
2. The wholeness of each level depends on an organizing field, called a morphic field. This field is within and around the system it organizes, and is a vibratory pattern of activity that interacts with electromagnetic and quantum fields of the system. The generic name "morphic field" includes
(a) Morphogenetic fields that shape the development of plants and animals.
(b) Behavioral and perceptual fields that organize the movements, fixed-action patterns and instincts of animals.
(c) Social fields that link together and coordinate the behaviour of social groups.
(d) Mental fields that underlie mental activities and shape the habits of minds.
3. Morhpic fields contain attractors (goals), and chreodes toward its end state, and maintain its integrity, stabilizing it against disruptions.
4. Morphic fields are shaped by morphic resonance from all similar past systems, and thus contain a cumulative collective memory. Morphic resonance depends on similarity, and is not attenuated by distance in space or time. Morhpic fields are local, within and around the systems they organize, but morphic resonance is non-local.
5. Morphic resonance involves a transfer of form or in-form-ation rather than a transfer of energy.
6. Morphic fields are fields of probability, like quantum fields, and they work by imposing patterns on otherwise random events in the systems under their influence.
7. All self-organizing systems are influenced by self-resonance from their own past, which plays an essential role in maintaining a holon's identity and continuity. (pp. 99-100)
"Habits alone cannot explain evolution. They are by their very nature conservative. They account for repetition, but not for creativity. Evolution must involve a combination of these two processes: through creativity, new patterns of organization arise; those that survive and are repeated become increasingly habitual. Some new patterns are favored by natural selection and others are not. … Creativity consists in the manifestation of eternally preexisting possibilities. In other words, the new pattern has not been created at all; it has only been manifested in the physical world, whereas previously it was unmanifest." (p. 105)
"Bergson argued that we need not attribute to these possibilities, which are unknowable until they actually happen, a preexistent reality transcending time and space." (p. 106) In other words, ongoing creativity, not pre-programmed possibilities.
Dogma #3: "The total amount of matter and energy is always the same …"
Chapter Summary: "In the Big Bang all the matter and energy in the universe suddenly appeared from nowhere. Modern cosmology supposes that dark matter and dark energy no make up 96 percent of reality. No one knows what dark matter or energy are, how they work or how they interact with familiar forms of matter or energy. The amount of dark energy seems to be increasing as the universe expands, and the 'quintessence field' may give rise to new matter and energy, more in some places than others. [AI: I think this is weak evidence, given that Electric Universe theory pretty much debunks both the Big Bang and dark matter/energy…] The evidence for energy conservation in living organisms is weak, and there are several anomalies, like the apparent ability of some people to live without food for long periods, that suggest the existence of new forms of energy. All quantum processes are supposed to be mediated through the quantum-vacuum field, also known as the zero-point field, which is not empty but full of energy and continually gives rise to virtual photons and particles of matter. Could this energy be tapped in new technologies?" (pp. 82-3)
Not much of interest in this chapter, for me at least. There is the interesting observation, however, that the Big Bang theory was essentially "a conspiracy to shore up Christianity" ("The creation of all matter and energy in the Beginning is presupposed by the Big Bang creation story, just as it was by Rene Descartes, Robert Boyle, Isaac Newton and other scientists who wanted to make physics compatible with an initial act of creation by God"). (p. 65)
"In contrast with matter and bodies, forces and energies are not things: they are to do with processes in time." (p. 57) Even atoms are not static things, but "structures of activity … vibratory patterns of activity within fields." (p. 60)
Chapter 3
Dogma #4: "The laws of nature are fixed. …"
Chapter Summary: "The idea that the 'laws of nature' are fixed while the universe evolves is an assumption left over from pre-evolutionary cosmology. The laws may themselves evolve or, rather, be more like habits. Also, the 'fundamental constants' may be variable, and their values may not have been fixed at the instant of the Big Bang. They still seem to be varying today. There may be an inherent memory in nature. All organisms may participate in a collective memory of their kind. Crystals may crystallize the way they do because they formed that way before; the more crystals of a particular chemical arise in one place, the easier should they crystallize everywhere else on earth, and maybe throughout the universe. Evolution may be the result of an interplay between habits and creativity. New forms and patterns of organization appear spontaneously, and are subject to natural selection. Those that survive are more likely to appear again as new habits build up, and through repetition they become increasingly habitual." (p. 108)
If the universe is constantly evolving, why not the physical laws also? Laws were given attributes of God (eternal, universal) because they were seen as made by God. There's evidence that published values of 'universal constants' vary over time (fine structure constant, gravity, speed of light). They depend on laboratory measurements. Perhaps they change, or perhaps they "oscillate within fairly narrow limits, or even vary chaotically." (p. 93) How were laws imprinted at the time of the Big Bang? How are they remembered, how the universe maintained?
Some quotes of interest:
Charles Sanders Peirce: "Matter is merely mind deadened by the development of habit to the point where the breaking up of these habits is very difficult." (p. 98)
Alfred North Whitehead: "There are no natural laws. There are only temporary habits of nature." (p. 99)
"evolutionary cosmology implies the evolution of habits." (p. 99)
Morphic resonance summary:
1. Self-organizing systems including molecules, cells, tissues, organs, organisms, societies and minds are made up of nested hierarchies or holarchies of holons or morphic units. At each level the whole is more than the sum of the parts, and these parts themselves are wholes made up of parts.
2. The wholeness of each level depends on an organizing field, called a morphic field. This field is within and around the system it organizes, and is a vibratory pattern of activity that interacts with electromagnetic and quantum fields of the system. The generic name "morphic field" includes
(a) Morphogenetic fields that shape the development of plants and animals.
(b) Behavioral and perceptual fields that organize the movements, fixed-action patterns and instincts of animals.
(c) Social fields that link together and coordinate the behaviour of social groups.
(d) Mental fields that underlie mental activities and shape the habits of minds.
3. Morhpic fields contain attractors (goals), and chreodes toward its end state, and maintain its integrity, stabilizing it against disruptions.
4. Morphic fields are shaped by morphic resonance from all similar past systems, and thus contain a cumulative collective memory. Morphic resonance depends on similarity, and is not attenuated by distance in space or time. Morhpic fields are local, within and around the systems they organize, but morphic resonance is non-local.
5. Morphic resonance involves a transfer of form or in-form-ation rather than a transfer of energy.
6. Morphic fields are fields of probability, like quantum fields, and they work by imposing patterns on otherwise random events in the systems under their influence.
7. All self-organizing systems are influenced by self-resonance from their own past, which plays an essential role in maintaining a holon's identity and continuity. (pp. 99-100)
"Habits alone cannot explain evolution. They are by their very nature conservative. They account for repetition, but not for creativity. Evolution must involve a combination of these two processes: through creativity, new patterns of organization arise; those that survive and are repeated become increasingly habitual. Some new patterns are favored by natural selection and others are not. … Creativity consists in the manifestation of eternally preexisting possibilities. In other words, the new pattern has not been created at all; it has only been manifested in the physical world, whereas previously it was unmanifest." (p. 105)
"Bergson argued that we need not attribute to these possibilities, which are unknowable until they actually happen, a preexistent reality transcending time and space." (p. 106) In other words, ongoing creativity, not pre-programmed possibilities.
Eva
Jedi
Thanks for continuing with this summary Approaching Infinity.
I think he's trying to explain everything in matter and energy terms. I find Laura's approach on how life doesn't conform to the thermodynamic laws -which he addresses I think when he speaks of "anomalies" in the energy conservation in living organisms - with the crucial differentiation of information from matter and energy (which is in fact one and the same) more complete.
Is it possible that nature is subject to the same process an individual is? Programmed, habitual, in need of a shock to evolve. Are the other celestial bodies including comets, Earth's "alarm clocks" ? I understand the idea in HoM is that they are a sort of alarm clock for humanity, when psychopathy reigns free comets clean up the filth. But is it possible that they are directed to the Earth and not humanity? Not that it really matters, but I had a jaw dropping moment when I thought of the Earth as a mechanical "individual" going through the same process as a human being on their way to awakening. Does that make any sense ?
Interesting word play. The English word was created from the Latin informare meaning "give form".
In Greek information comes from the words "bring" and "complete" as in bring completeness.
So, how about information steps up form until completeness is reached. And in that sense form would account for density changes 1st to 2nd to 3rd etc, as well as epigenetic changes within a single density.
Approaching Infinity said:
I think he's trying to explain everything in matter and energy terms. I find Laura's approach on how life doesn't conform to the thermodynamic laws -which he addresses I think when he speaks of "anomalies" in the energy conservation in living organisms - with the crucial differentiation of information from matter and energy (which is in fact one and the same) more complete.
Approaching Infinity said:
Is it possible that nature is subject to the same process an individual is? Programmed, habitual, in need of a shock to evolve. Are the other celestial bodies including comets, Earth's "alarm clocks" ? I understand the idea in HoM is that they are a sort of alarm clock for humanity, when psychopathy reigns free comets clean up the filth. But is it possible that they are directed to the Earth and not humanity? Not that it really matters, but I had a jaw dropping moment when I thought of the Earth as a mechanical "individual" going through the same process as a human being on their way to awakening. Does that make any sense ?
Approaching Infinity said:
Interesting word play. The English word was created from the Latin informare meaning "give form".
In Greek information comes from the words "bring" and "complete" as in bring completeness.
So, how about information steps up form until completeness is reached. And in that sense form would account for density changes 1st to 2nd to 3rd etc, as well as epigenetic changes within a single density.
Here's Sheldrake's talk from the Electric Universe conference earlier this year: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0waMBY3qEA4
I found it quite entertaining. He makes some good jokes along the way. Basically it's a discussion of some of the things from the book. At the end he talks about panpsychism, Nagel's book, and cosmic mind. Dean Radin's talk was also good, on psi experiments (using double-slit experiments, laser diffraction, and telepathy): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJwsSbiVE2g
I found it quite entertaining. He makes some good jokes along the way. Basically it's a discussion of some of the things from the book. At the end he talks about panpsychism, Nagel's book, and cosmic mind. Dean Radin's talk was also good, on psi experiments (using double-slit experiments, laser diffraction, and telepathy): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJwsSbiVE2g
domwatts23
Jedi
As I said in another thread, this is a link to a really interesting dialogue between Rupert Sheldrake and a very knowledgeable British philosopher and theologian Joseph Milne. It's fascinating! Maybe someone here will enjoy it as much as I did
http://presentations.thelincolncentre.co.uk/temenos/20090713.html
http://presentations.thelincolncentre.co.uk/temenos/20090713.html
D
Deleted member 8431
Guest
Approaching Infinity said:
Thanks!
I've watched the 2013 conference entirely and it was really good. I like how they even include consciousness as a fundamental part of our reality. Even proposing that "observation/knowledge/information" (actual terms they use) collapses the wave function and showing even that a single mind can diminish it's amplitude even if only by a very little bit. This is staggering evidence, osit. But as they say: "no chance of getting it peer reviewed".
Or when they talk about stars "knowing what to do" (not really in those specific terms) really puts the whole hyperdimensional/metaphysical aspect into play. They include the principle of consciousness universally which is very nice.
I can't believe how twisted the mainstream theory is. Especially the string theory. ;)
domwatts23
Jedi
My friend was actually responsible for organising Sheldrake's TED talk - they are undergoing quite a battle about it
domwatts23 said:
Any details they can share? Maybe write an article about it?
