Rupert Sheldrake: Difference between revisions
edit maintains an npov giving weight to critics, cites notable sources like JCS and other notable sources- as it stands, it is a way to avoid libel suits for "defamation": http://sciencesetfree.tumblr.com/post/63184238054/wikipedia-under-threat |
minor fix - remember, edit maintains an npov giving weight to critics, cites notable sources like JCS - as it stands, it is a way to avoid libel suits for "defamation": http://sciencesetfree.tumblr.com/post/63184238054/wikipedia-under-threat |
||
Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
In 1994 Sheldrake proposed a list of ''Seven Experiments That Could Change the World''. He encouraged lay people to contribute to scientific research and argued that scientific experiments similar to his own could be conducted on a shoestring budget.<ref name=seven-exp/> The methodology of one of these experiments, regarding phantom limbs, has drawn criticism.<ref name=alcock/> This text included the seed of Sheldrake's next book, ''Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home'' (1999), which covered his research into purported telepathy between humans and animals, particularly dogs. Sheldrake suggests that such interspecies telepathy is a real phenomenon and that morphic resonance is responsible for it.<ref name=dogs/> |
In 1994 Sheldrake proposed a list of ''Seven Experiments That Could Change the World''. He encouraged lay people to contribute to scientific research and argued that scientific experiments similar to his own could be conducted on a shoestring budget.<ref name=seven-exp/> The methodology of one of these experiments, regarding phantom limbs, has drawn criticism.<ref name=alcock/> This text included the seed of Sheldrake's next book, ''Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home'' (1999), which covered his research into purported telepathy between humans and animals, particularly dogs. Sheldrake suggests that such interspecies telepathy is a real phenomenon and that morphic resonance is responsible for it.<ref name=dogs/> |
||
Prior to the publication of ''Dogs That Know'', [[Richard Wiseman]] independently conducted an experimental study with one of the dogs mentioned in the book and concluded that the evidence gathered did not support telepathy.<ref name=wiseman2/><ref name=wiseman1/> In an interview in [[The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe]], Wiseman stated, "Rupert then came along, did his own tests using a different procedure and claimed the dog was psychic and then reanalysed our data and found the same patents in our data he had in his. And I think those patterns are there as well, but the question is the interpretation of them."<ref>"The Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe. Podcast #126 - December 19th, 2007" @53:40: http://www.theskepticsguide.org/podcast/sgu/126 - accessed October 20, 2013</ref> Wiseman's interpretation of results has drawn criticism by other authors publishing in the same journal that Wiseman presented his |
Prior to the publication of ''Dogs That Know'', [[Richard Wiseman]] independently conducted an experimental study with one of the dogs mentioned in the book and concluded that the evidence gathered did not support telepathy.<ref name=wiseman2/><ref name=wiseman1/> In an interview in [[The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe]], Wiseman stated, "Rupert then came along, did his own tests using a different procedure and claimed the dog was psychic and then reanalysed our data and found the same patents in our data he had in his. And I think those patterns are there as well, but the question is the interpretation of them."<ref>"The Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe. Podcast #126 - December 19th, 2007" @53:40: http://www.theskepticsguide.org/podcast/sgu/126 - accessed October 20, 2013</ref> Wiseman's interpretation of results has drawn criticism by other authors publishing in the same journal that Wiseman presented his arguments against Sheldrake in.<ref name=Carter>{{cite journal |author=Carter, Chris |title="Heads I Lose, Tails You Win", Or, How Richard Wiseman Nullifies Positive Results, and What to Do about It: A Response to Wiseman’s (2010) Critique of Parapsychology |journal=Journal of the Society for Psychical Research |year=2010 |url=http://www.deanradin.com/evidence/Carter2010.pdf |format=pdf}}</ref> |
||
===''The Sense of Being Stared At''=== |
===''The Sense of Being Stared At''=== |
Revision as of 10:35, 20 October 2013
Rupert Sheldrake | |
---|---|
photograph | |
Born | |
Nationality | British |
Education |
|
Occupation(s) | Biochemist, parapsychologist, writer |
Employer | The Perrott-Warrick Fund (2005–2010) |
Website | www.sheldrake.org |
Alfred Rupert Sheldrake (born 28 June 1942)[1] is an English author, lecturer and parapsychologist.[2][3][4] From 1967 to 1973 he was a biochemist and cell biologist at the University of Cambridge. After his time at Cambridge, Sheldrake was principal plant physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) until 1978.[5] Since then, his work has largely centred on "morphic resonance", his idea that "memory is inherent in nature" and that "natural systems, such as termite colonies, or pigeons, or orchid plants, or insulin molecules, inherit a collective memory from all previous things of their kind."[6] Sheldrake argues that morphic resonance is also responsible for "telepathy-type interconnections between organisms".[7] As such, his advocacy of the idea encompasses subjects such as animal and plant development and behaviour as well as various parapsychological claims involving memory, telepathy, perception and cognition.[6][8]
Sheldrake has questioned several of the foundations of modern science, arguing that science has become a series of dogmas rather than an open-minded approach to investigating phenomena. One of the foundations he questions is the law of conservation of energy[9], in opposition to the scientific consensus that energy is always conserved.[10] While not mentioning perpetual motion devices in his book, save for a brief reference to exploring the possibility of devices tapping into the quantum vacuum, he suggested in a lecture related to the book, that there should be a prize that would be similar to the X Prize to either definitively refute or confirm whether such devices had any viability.[11]
Notable scientists who have examined the idea of morphic resonance have called it pseudoscience, citing a lack of evidence supporting the concept and its inconsistency with established scientific theories. Others have suggested the possibility that it might one day integrate with mainstream science, but have acknowledged its fringe status. Many critics have expressed concern over Sheldrake's self-promotion, and have argued that Sheldrake's books and public appearances attract popular attention in a way that has a negative impact on the public's understanding of science.[a]
Early life and education
Sheldrake was born in Newark-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire[27] to Doris (née Tebbutt)[28] and Reginald Alfred Sheldrake (1903-1970) on 28 June 1942.[29][30] Reginald Sheldrake graduated from Nottingham University with a degree in pharmacy.[31] He was an amateur naturalist and microscopist who encouraged his son's interest in plants and animals.[7]
Rupert Sheldrake studied at Worksop College[27] and Clare College, Cambridge (with a year at Harvard University). He earned both a Bachelor of Arts degree and a Ph.D. in biochemistry for his work researching plant development and plant hormones.[7]
Academic career
Sheldrake began his post-doctoral studies in biochemistry and cell biology at Clare College, assisted by funding through a Royal Society research fellowship.[32] He conducted studies about auxin, a hormone which plays a role in plant vascular cell differentiation[33] and published a number of papers based on these studies.[34][35] By Sheldrake's account, he ended this line of study when he concluded that "the system is circular, it does not explain how [differentiation is] established to start with. After nine years of intensive study, it became clear to me that biochemistry would not solve the problem of why things have the basic shape they do."[33] Of morphic resonance he says,
The idea came to me in a moment of insight and was extremely exciting. It interested some of my colleagues at Clare College - philosophers, linguists, and classicists were quite open-minded. But the idea of mysterious telepathy-type interconnections between organisms and of collective memories within species didn’t go down too well with my colleagues in the science labs. Not that they were aggressively hostile; they just made fun of it. Whenever I said something like, "I’ve just got to go and make a telephone call," they said, "Ha, ha, why bother? Do it by morphic resonance!"[7]
He resigned his position at Clare College and went to work on the physiology of tropical crops in Hyderabad, India as principal plant physiologist at ICRISAT from 1974 to 1978, retaining an affiliation with the institute as a consultant physiologist until 1985.[5][7] There he published a number of papers on crop physiology[36] and co-authored a book on the anatomy of the pigeonpea.[37] For a year and a half he lived in the ashram of Bede Griffiths where he wrote A New Science of Life which was published in 1981.[7]
Since 2004[38] Sheldrake has been a visiting professor at the Graduate Institute in Bethany, Connecticut,[32] where he was also academic director of the Holistic Learning and Thinking Program until 2012.[39] From September 2005 until 2010, Sheldrake was a Senior Researcher in psychical research, funded by a bequest (the Perrott-Warrick Fund) administered by Trinity College, Cambridge.[40]
Books
Sheldrake is the author of several books. In writing books aimed at the general public, he has been accused of avoiding the peer-review process expected for science.[23] Sheldrake has however published in journals - some mainstream and some fringe, where he put forth his ideas.[41]
A New Science of Life and The Presence of the Past
Sheldrake's A New Science of Life: The Hypothesis of Morphic Resonance was published in 1981. In it he proposed that through "morphic resonance" various perceived phenomena, particularly biological ones, become more probable the more often they occur, and therefore biological growth and behaviour become guided into patterns laid down by previous similar events. As a result, he suggests that newly acquired behaviours can be passed down to future generations − a biological proposition akin to Lamarckian inheritance. He generalizes this approach to assert that it explains many aspects of science, from evolution to laws of nature; in Sheldrake's formulation, laws of nature are merely mutable habits, evolving and changing since the Big Bang.[42]
In September 1981, Nature published an editorial about A New Science of Life entitled "A book for burning?"[17] Authored by John Maddox, the journal's senior editor, the editorial said
...Sheldrake's book is a splendid illustration of the widespread public misconception of what science is about. In reality, Sheldrake's argument is in no sense a scientific argument but is an exercise in pseudo-science... Many readers will be left with the impression that Sheldrake has succeeded in finding a place for magic within scientific discussion – and this, indeed, may have been a part of the objective of writing such a book.[17]
Maddox concluded that the book should not be burned, but this didn't prevent the article title from being widely publicised.[23][43] In a subsequent issue, Nature published several letters which expressed disapproval of the editorial,[44][45][46][47] including one by physicist B. D. Josephson who criticised Maddox for "a failure to admit even the possibility that genuine physical facts may exist which lie outside the scope of current scientific descriptions."[44] In 2009 an editor for Nature said that Maddox's reference to book burning backfired,[23] although since the publication of A New Science of Life Sheldrake's morphic resonance continues to be widely regarded as pseudoscience.[16][14][18][19]
In his next book, The Presence of the Past: Morphic Resonance and the Habits of Nature (1988), Sheldrake expanded on his morphic resonance hypothesis and marshalled experimental evidence which he said supported the hypothesis.[6] The book was reviewed favourably in New Scientist by historian Theodore Roszak who called it "engaging, provocative" and "a tour de force". When the book was re-issued in 2011 with these quotes on the front cover, New Scientist remarked, "Back then, Roszak gave Sheldrake the benefit of the doubt", and added that if New Scientist were to review the re-issue, the book's publisher "wouldn't be mining it for promotional purposes."[48]
Sheldrake's morphic resonance hypothesis is discredited by numerous critics on many grounds. These grounds include the lack of evidence for the hypothesis[23][24][22][25] and the inconsistency of the hypothesis with established scientific theories[16][26], though Hans-Peter Dürr has argued differently, suggesting a connection between his views and quantum physics, and that for him, "it is difficult to understand why modern biologists do not make more use of the revolutionary ideas of modern physics, seeing that the processes of life, as Sheldrake makes obvious, seem predestined to act as a bridge."[20]
Other critics have suggested that Morphic resonance lacks scientific credibilty for being overly vague[17][18] and unfalsifiable.[17][24] Further, Sheldrake's experimental methods have been criticised for being poorly designed and subject to experimenter bias,[49][50][26] and his analyses of results have also drawn criticism.[18][51] Sheldrake has written rejoinders to two of the critics.[52][53]
One test for morphic resonance involving ability to learn Morse code vs. a novel code, published in the Journal of Analytical Psychology, tested three groups of students, and found that the Morse code was initially easier to learn, and the novel code itself became easier over the three groups.[54] A similar experiment that tested real vs. fake symbols, and real Russian words vs. fake Russian words with a group that lacked familiarity with these symbols, and had controls in place for subjects who had knowledge of a symbol to exclude it from the analysis for the participant, found that the genuine symbols and words were consistently deemed more credible by test subjects, and cited Sheldrake's morphic fields proposal as relevant in the introduction and discussion section of the study.[55] Another researcher was able to show a similar effect - in this experiment sixty participants were exposed to 10 stimuli consisting of 5 genuine Chinese characters and 5 false characters that were derived from genuine characters with the assistance of a native Chinese speaker in such a way as to appear authentic. Subsequently participants were asked to identify which characters they could recognize among a sheet of 20 that included all 10 that were originally presented intermixed with 10 decoys (also 5 real and 5 false). In this experiment it was found that participants accurately recognized more of the genuine than false characters.[56]. The researcher replicated this experiment once[57], but then failed to replicate it a second time.[58] Sheldrake has engaged critics in The Skeptical Inquirer over two areas in which morphic resonance was an item of debate - melting points[59][60][61] and computers.[62][63][64]
"Morphic Computing", based on morphic resonance, has been proposed in an article of that name in the journal "Applied Soft Computing".[65]
In 2009 a revised and expanded edition of A New Science of Life was published in the United States under the title Morphic Resonance: The Nature of Formative Causation.[8]
Seven Experiments and Dogs That Know
In 1994 Sheldrake proposed a list of Seven Experiments That Could Change the World. He encouraged lay people to contribute to scientific research and argued that scientific experiments similar to his own could be conducted on a shoestring budget.[66] The methodology of one of these experiments, regarding phantom limbs, has drawn criticism.[50] This text included the seed of Sheldrake's next book, Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home (1999), which covered his research into purported telepathy between humans and animals, particularly dogs. Sheldrake suggests that such interspecies telepathy is a real phenomenon and that morphic resonance is responsible for it.[67]
Prior to the publication of Dogs That Know, Richard Wiseman independently conducted an experimental study with one of the dogs mentioned in the book and concluded that the evidence gathered did not support telepathy.[51][68] In an interview in The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe, Wiseman stated, "Rupert then came along, did his own tests using a different procedure and claimed the dog was psychic and then reanalysed our data and found the same patents in our data he had in his. And I think those patterns are there as well, but the question is the interpretation of them."[69] Wiseman's interpretation of results has drawn criticism by other authors publishing in the same journal that Wiseman presented his arguments against Sheldrake in.[70]
The Sense of Being Stared At
In 2003 Sheldrake published The Sense of Being Stared At which explored telepathy, precognition, and the "psychic staring effect". It included an experiment where blindfolded subjects guessed whether persons were staring at them or at another target. He reported that in thousands of trials, around 60 percent of subjects reported being stared at when being stared at; around 50 percent (even chance) of subjects reported being stared at when they were not being stared at. Sheldrake attributes this effect to morphic resonance.[71] Several independent experimenters were unable to duplicate these results, with some citing design flaws in Sheldrake's experiments.[24][49][72] Sheldrake wrote a rejoinder to the experimenters in an article in The Skeptical Inquirer[73], followed by a subsequent reply by one of the critics.[74] A special edition of the Journal of Consciousness Studies, Sheldrake and His Critics: The Sense of Being Glared At, contained a presentation of the idea, responses from critics and supporters, and a response to commentators.[75] A meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Psychology concluded that for the "sense of being stared at" there are hints of an effect, but also a shortage of independent replications and theoretical concepts.[76]
The Science Delusion / Science Set Free
The Science Delusion, published on 1 January 2012 in the UK and in the US on 4 September 2012 as Science Set Free: 10 Paths to New Discovery, summarises much of Sheldrake's previous work and encapsulates it into a broader critique of philosophical materialism,[9] with the title apparently mimicking that of The God Delusion by one of his critics, Richard Dawkins. In an interview with Fortean Times, Sheldrake denied that Dawkins' book was the inspiration for his own, saying, "The title was at the insistence of my publishers, and the book will be re-titled in the USA as Science Set Free... Dawkins is a passionate believer in materialist dogma, but the book is not a response to him".[77]
Sheldrake proposes a number of questions as the theme of each chapter which seek to elaborate on his central premise that science is predicated on the belief that the nature of reality is fully understood, with only minor details needing to be filled in. This "delusion" is what Sheldrake argues has turned science into a series of dogmas grounded in philosophical materialism rather than an open-minded approach to investigating phenomena. He argues that there are many powerful taboos that circumscribe what scientists can legitimately direct their attention towards.[9] The mainstream view of modern science is that it proceeds by methodological naturalism and does not require philosophical materialism.[78]
Sheldrake questions conservation of energy - he calls it a "scientific dogma", says that inedia and devices tapping into the quantum vacuum should be investigated as possible phenomena, and claims that "the evidence for energy conservation in living organisms is weak". He argues in favour of alternative medicine and psychic phenomena, saying that their recognition as being legitimate is impeded by a "scientific priesthood" with an "authoritarian mentality". Citing his earlier "psychic staring effect" experiments and other reasons, he claims that minds are not confined to brains and remarks that "liberating minds from confinement in heads is like being released from prison." He suggests that DNA is insufficient to explain inheritance, and that inheritance of form and behavior is mediated through morphic resonance. He also promotes morphic resonance in broader fashion as an explanation for other phenomena such as memory.[9]
New Scientist characterised Science Set Free as "woolly credulousness" and chided Sheldrake for "uncritically embracing all kinds of fringe ideas".[79] A review in Philosophy Now called the book "disturbingly eccentric", combining "a disorderly collage of scientific fact and opinion with an intrusive yet disjunctive metaphysical programme".[80]
The book was positively reviewed in The Guardian by philosopher Mary Midgley who welcomed it as "a new mind-body paradigm" to address "the unlucky fact that our current form of mechanistic materialism rests on muddled, outdated notions of matter".[81] Writer and former Anglican priest Mark Vernon also positively reviewed the book.[82] In another review, Deepak Chopra commended Sheldrake for wanting "to end the breach between science and religion".[83]
Public appearances
Sheldrake has received popular coverage through newspapers, radio, television and speaking engagements.
An experiment involving measuring the time for subjects to recognize hidden images, with morphic resonance being posited to aid in recognition, was conducted in 1984 by the BBC popular science programme Tomorrow's World.[8] In the outcome of the experiment, one set of data yielded positive results and another set yielded negative results.[84]
Sheldrake was the subject of an episode of Heretics of Science, a six-part documentary series broadcast on BBC 2 in 1994.[85] On this episode, John Maddox discussed "A book for burning?", his 1981 Nature editorial review of Sheldrake's book, A New Science of Life: The Hypothesis of Morphic Resonance. Maddox said that morphic resonance "is not a scientific theory. Sheldrake is putting forward magic instead of science, and that can be condemned with exactly the language that the Pope used to condemn Galileo, and for the same reasons: it is heresy."[84] The broadcast displayed, repeatedly, footage of book burning, sometimes accompanied by audio of a crowd chanting "heretic".[84] Biologist Steven Rose criticised the broadcast for focusing on Maddox's rhetoric as if it was "all that mattered". "There wasn't much sense of the scientific or metascientific issues at stake", Rose said.[86]
In 2006, Sheldrake spoke at a meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science about experimental results on telepathy replicated by "a 1980s girl band", drawing criticism from Peter Atkins, Lord Winston, and Richard Wiseman. The Royal Society also reacted to the event saying, "Modern science is based on a rigorous evidence-based process involving experiment and observation. The results and interpretations should always be exposed to robust peer review."[87]
In April 2008, Sheldrake was stabbed by a man during a lecture in Santa Fe, New Mexico. The man told a reporter that he thought Sheldrake had been using him as a "guinea pig" in telepathic mind control experiments for over five years.[88] Sheldrake suffered a wound to the leg and has since recovered.[88][89]
In January 2013, Sheldrake gave a TEDx lecture at TEDxWhitechapel in East London roughly summarizing ideas from his book, The Science Delusion. In his talk, Sheldrake claimed that modern science rests on ten dogmas which "fall apart" upon examination and promoted his hypothesis of morphic resonance. According to a statement issued by TED staff, TED’s scientific advisors "questioned whether his list is a fair description of scientific assumptions" and believed that "there is little evidence for some of Sheldrake’s more radical claims, such as his theory of morphic resonance". The advisors recommended that the talk "should not be distributed without being framed with caution". The video of the talk was moved from the TEDx YouTube channel to the TED blog accompanied by the framing language called for by the advisors. The move and framing prompted accusations of censorship, to which TED responded by saying the accusations were "simply not true" and that Sheldrake's talk was "up on our website".[90][91]
The attention Sheldrake receives has raised concerns that it adversely affects the public understanding of science.[17][18][23][4] Scientists have accused Sheldrake of self-promotion,[17][18][23] with one commenting, "for the inventors of such hypotheses the rewards include a degree of instant fame which is harder to achieve by the humdrum pursuit of more conventional science."[18]
Interactions with notable scientists
In 1982 Sheldrake and David Bohm published a dialogue in which they compared Sheldrake's ideas to Bohm's implicate order.[92] In 1996 Sheldrake was prominently cited in Alan Sokal's preposterous paper which became known as the Sokal hoax.[93] In 1997 Physicist Hans-Peter Dürr speculated about Sheldrake's work in relation to modern physics.[94]
Sheldrake and developmental biologist Lewis Wolpert have made a scientific wager about the importance of DNA in the developing organism. Wolpert bet Sheldrake "a case of fine port" that "By 1 May 2029, given the genome of a fertilised egg of an animal or plant, we will be able to predict in at least one case all the details of the organism that develops from it, including any abnormalities." Sheldrake denies that DNA contains a recipe for morphological development. The Royal Society will be asked to determine the winner if the result is not obvious.[95]
Origin and philosophy of morphic resonance
Among his early influences Sheldrake cites The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn. Sheldrake says the book led him to view contemporary scientific understanding of life as a paradigm, which he called "the mechanistic theory of life". Reading Kuhn's work, Sheldrake says, fixed his focus on how scientific paradigms can change.[7]
Although there are similarities between morphic resonance and Hinduism's akashic records,[96] Sheldrake says he first conceived of the idea while at Cambridge, before his travel to India where he would later develop it. He attributes the origin of his morphic resonance idea to two influences: his studies of the holistic tradition in biology, and French philosopher Henri Bergson's book Matter and Memory. He says he took Bergson's concept of memories not being materially embedded in the brain and generalized it to morphic resonance, where memories are not only immaterial but also under the influence of the collective past memories of similar organisms. While his colleagues at Cambridge were not receptive to the idea, Sheldrake found the opposite to be true in India. He recounts his Indian colleagues saying, "There's nothing new in this, it was all known millennia ago to the ancient rishis." Sheldrake thus characterizes morphic resonance as a convergence between Western and Eastern thought, having originated in the West and developed in the East.[6][97]
Sheldrake has also noted similarities between morphic resonance and Carl Jung's collective unconscious, with regard to collective memories being shared across individuals and to the coalescing of particular behaviours through repetition, described by Jung as archetypes.[6] However where Jung had assumed a physical explanation for the collective unconscious, Sheldrake rejects any such explanation involving what he terms "mechanistic biology".[8]
Sheldrake has been described as a New Age author[98][99] and is popular among many in the New Age movement who view him as lending scientific credibility to their beliefs.[100][84] Sheldrake has not endorsed this description nor these views.[100]
Personal life
Sheldrake is married to Jill Purce, and they have two sons.[32]
He has a Methodist background, identified himself as an atheist for a time and found himself drawn back to Christianity during his time in India; the biography on his website now identifies him as Anglican.[27]
Bibliography
- A New Science of Life: the hypothesis of formative causation, Los Angeles, CA: J.P. Tarcher, 1981 (second edition 1985, third edition 2009). ISBN 978-1-84831-042-1.
- The Presence of the Past: morphic resonance and the habits of nature, New York, NY: Times Books, 1988. ISBN 0-8129-1666-2.
- The Rebirth of Nature: the greening of science and God, New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1991. ISBN 0-553-07105-X.
- Seven Experiments That Could Change the World: a do-it-yourself guide to revolutionary science, New York, NY: Riverhead Books, 1995. ISBN 1-57322-014-0.
- Dogs that Know When Their Owners are Coming Home: and other unexplained powers of animals, New York, NY: Crown, 1999 (second edition 2011). ISBN 978-0-307-88596-8.
- The Sense of Being Stared At: and other aspects of the extended mind, New York, NY: Crown Publishers, 2003. ISBN 0-609-60807-X.
- The Science Delusion: Freeing the spirit of enquiry, London: Coronet, 2012. ISBN 978-1-4447-2795-1.
- Science Set Free: 10 Paths to New Discovery. Deepak Chopra, 2012. ISBN 978-0770436704.
With Ralph Abraham and Terence McKenna:
- Trialogues at the Edge of the West: chaos, creativity, and the resacralization of the world, Santa Fe, NM: Bear & Co. Pub., 1992. ISBN 0-939680-97-1.
- The Evolutionary Mind: trialogues at the edge of the unthinkable, Santa Cruz, CA: Dakota Books, 1997. ISBN 0-9632861-1-0.
- Chaos, Creativity and Cosmic Consciousness, Rochester, VT: Park Street Press, 2001. ISBN 0-89281-977-4.
- The Evolutionary Mind: conversations on science, imagination & spirit, Rhinebeck, NY: Monkfish Book Pub. Co., 2005. ISBN 0-9749359-7-2.
With Matthew Fox:
- Natural Grace: dialogues on creation, darkness, and the soul in spirituality and science, New York, NY: Doubleday, 1996. ISBN 0-385-48356-2.
- The Physics of Angels: exploring the realm where science and spirit meet, San Francisco, CA: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996. ISBN 0-06-062864-2.
See also
- Fritjof Capra
- Epigenetics
- Hundredth monkey effect
- Noosphere
- Bodo Sperling
- Synchronicity
- Lyall Watson
Notes
- ^ Sources:
- reject morphic resonance[12][13][14][15][16]
- reject as pseudoscience[14][16][17][18][19]
- suggest possibility of integration[20]
- reject as magical thinking[17][21]
- lack of evidence supporting the hypothesis[15][22][23][24][25]
- inconsistency of the idea with established scientific theories[16][26]
- impact on the public's understanding of science[17][18][23][4]
References
- ^ McGrath, K. A. (1999). World of biology. Gale.
- ^ "Overhyped". Nature. 443: 132. 14 September 2006.
- ^ "When science meets the paranormal". New Scientist. 2438. 13 March 2004.
- ^ a b c Whitfield, J. (22 January 2004). "Telepathic charm seduces audience at paranormal debate". Nature. 427(6972): 277.
- ^ a b Sheldrake, Rupert; McKenna, Terence K.; Abraham, Ralph (2011). Chaos, Creativity, and Cosmic Consciousness. Inner Traditions / Bear & Co. p. 181-182.
- ^ a b c d e Sheldrake, Rupert (2011). The presence of the past: Morphic resonance and the habits of nature. Icon Books.
- ^ a b c d e f g Sheldrake, Rupert. "Biography of Rupert Sheldrake, Ph.D. – Part II". Sheldrake.org. Retrieved 28 May 2008.
- ^ a b c d Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). Morphic resonance: the nature of formative causation. Inner Traditions/Bear & Co.
- ^ a b c d Sheldrake, Rupert (2012). The Science Delusion: Freeing the spirit of enquiry. London: Coronet.
- ^ Spellman, F. R.; Price-Bayer, J. (2011). In Defense of Science: Why Scientific Literacy Matters. Government Institutes. p. 81.
- ^ "Rupert Sheldrake at EU 2013—"Science Set Free" (Part 1)" @13:40: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0waMBY3qEA4 - accessed October 20, 2013
- ^ Gardner, M. (1988). The New Age: notes of a fringe-watcher. Prometheus books.
Almost all scientists who have looked into Sheldrake's theory consider it balderdash.
- ^ Samuel, L. R. (2011). Supernatural America: A Cultural History: A Cultural History. ABC-CLIO.
...most biologists considered Sheldrake's theory of morphic resonance hogwash...
- ^ a b c Sharma, Ruchir (2012). Breakout Nations: In Pursuit of the Next Economic Miracles. WW Norton & Company.
Despite Sheldrake's legitimate scientific credentials, his peers have roundly dismissed his theory as pseudoscience.
- ^ a b Hood, Bruce M (2009). Supersense: Why we believe in the unbelievable. HarperOne. p. 232.
The trouble is that, whereas electric and magnetic fields are easily measurable and obey laws, morphic resonance remains elusive and has no demonstrable laws. No other area of science would accept such lawless, weak evidence as proof, which is why the majority of the scientific community has generally dismissed this theory and the evidence.
- ^ a b c d e Wolpert, Lewis (11 January 1984). "A matter of fact or fancy?: SECOND OPINION". The Guardian. p. 11.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Maddox, John (24 September 1981). "A book for burning?" (PDF). Nature. 293 (5830): 245–246. Bibcode:1981Natur.293R.245.. doi:10.1038/293245b0.
...Sheldrake's argument is in no sense a scientific argument but is an exercise in pseudo-science.
- ^ a b c d e f g h Rose, S. (1992). "So-called "Formative Causation". A Hypothesis Disconfirmed. Response to Rupert Sheldrake" (pdf). Riv. Biol./Biol. Forum. 85: 445–453.
Along with parapsychology, corn circles, creationism, ley-lines and "deep ecology", "formative causation", or "morphic resonance" has many of the characteristics of such pseudosciences...
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help) - ^ a b de Pracontal, M. (1986). L'imposture scientifique en dix leçons. Editions La Découverte.
- ^ a b Durr, Hans-Peter. 2007 Sheldrake's ideas from the perspective of modern physics. The Free Library (March, 22), http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Sheldrake's ideas from the perspective of modern physics.-a0182664602 (accessed October 20, 2013)
- ^ Carroll, Robert Todd. "Morphic Resonance". Skepdic.com. Retrieved 27 August 2012.
- ^ a b Blackmore, Susan (4 February 2009). "An idea with resonance: More than anything, Sheldrake's continuing popularity is rooted in our need to believe". The Guardian.
- ^ a b c d e f g h Rutherford, Adam (6 February 2009). "A book for ignoring: Sheldrake persists in his claims, despite the fact that there's no evidence for them. This is bad science". The Guardian. Retrieved 13 Jul. 2013.
{{cite web}}
: Check date values in:|accessdate=
(help) - ^ a b c d Shermer, Michael. "Rupert's Resonance". Scientific American. Retrieved 13 Jul. 2013.
{{cite web}}
: Check date values in:|accessdate=
(help) - ^ a b Rose, Steven (13 April 1988). "Some facts that just don't resonate: Second opinion". The Guardian. p. 27.
- ^ a b c Blackmore, S. (27 August 1999). "If the truth is out there, we've not found it yet". The Times Higher Education Supplement. 18.
- ^ a b c Chartres, Caroline, ed. (June 2006). Why I Am Still an Anglican: Essays and Conversations. Continuum.
- ^ Marriage record registered in September 1934, @ FreeBMD Images ref 1934M3-T-0308
- ^ "Birth record". findmypast.co.uk.
- ^ Marriage record registered in September 1934, @ FreeBMD Images ref 1934M3-S-0193
- ^ "Reginald Sheldrake Upon his Graduation, Newark, c 1924". Picturethepast.org.uk. Retrieved 3 January 2012.
- ^ a b c Sheldrake, Rupert. "Biography of Rupert Sheldrake, Ph.D." sheldrake.org. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2013.
{{cite web}}
: Check date values in:|accessdate=
(help) - ^ a b Lemley, B. (2000). "Heresy". Discover. 21(8): 60–65.
- ^ "Papers on Auxin Transport in Plants". sheldrake.org.
- ^ "Papers on Hormone Production in Plants". sheldrake.org.
- ^ Sheldrake, Rupert. "Papers on Crop Physiology". sheldrake.org.
- ^ Bisen, S. S.; Sheldrake, A. R. (1981). The anatomy of the pigeonpea. ICRISAT.
- ^ "ht_faculty". The Graduate Institute. archive.org.
- ^ Sheldrake, Rupert. "Biography of Rupert Sheldrake, Ph.D." archive.org.
- ^ Sheldrake, Rupert. "The Perrott-Warrick Project". Sheldrake.org. Retrieved 27 August 2012.
- ^ [1]
- ^ Sheldrake, Rupert (1981). A New Science of Life: the hypothesis of formative causation. Los Angeles, CA: J.P. Tarcher.
- ^ Maddox, J. (1999). "Dogs, telepathy and quantum mechanics". Nature. 401(6756): 849–850. Bibcode:1999Natur.401..849M. doi:10.1038/44696.
- ^ a b Josephson, B. D. (1981). "Incendiary subject". Nature. 293: 594.
- ^ Clarke, C. J. S. (1981). "Incendiary subject". Nature. 293: 594.
- ^ Hedges, R. (1981). "Incendiary subject". Nature. 293: 506.
- ^ Cousins, F. W. (1981). "Incendiary subject". Nature. 293: 506–594.
- ^ Lawton, Graham (14 June 2011). "Sheldrake book: Did we really say that?". New Scientist.
- ^ a b Marks, D., & Coiwell, J. (September/October, 2000). "The psychic staring effect: An artifact of pseudo-randomization". Skeptical Inquirer. 41: 49.
{{cite journal}}
: Check date values in:|date=
(help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ a b Psi wars: Getting to grips with the paranormal. Imprint Academic. 2003.
Rupert Sheldrake's (1994) popular book Seven Experiments That Could Change the World is more of a collection of seven deadly sins of science and, from a philosophy of science standpoint, a documentation of the reasons why parapsychology is regarded as pseudoscience.
{{cite book}}
: Unknown parameter|authors=
ignored (help) - ^ a b Wiseman, Richard; Smith, Matthew; Milton, Julie (2000). "The 'psychic pet' phenomenon: a reply to Rupert Sheldrake" (pdf). Journal of the Society for Psychical Research.
- ^ Sheldrake, R. (1992). "Rose refuted". Riv. Biol./Biol. Forum. 85: 455–460.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help) - ^ Sheldrake, Rupert. "Michael Shermer - Do Skeptics Play Fair?". Retrieved 20 October, 2013.
{{cite web}}
: Check date values in:|accessdate=
(help) - ^ Attention: This template ({{cite pmid}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by PMID 3804853, please use {{cite journal}} with
|pmid=3804853
instead. - ^ Schorn, R.; Tappeiner, G.; Walde, J. (2006). "Analyzing 'Spooky Action at a Distance' Concerning Brand Logos" (pdf). Innovative Marketing.
- ^ Robbins, K.; Roe, C. A. (2008). "An empirical test of the theory of morphic resonance using recognition for Chinese symbols". Proceedings of Presented Papers: The Parapsychological Association 51st Annual Convention & The Incorporated Society for Psychical Research 32nd Annual Conference.
- ^ Template:Cite PMID
- ^ Roe, C. A; Hitchman, G. A. (2011). "Testing the theory of morphic resonance using recognition for Chinese symbols: a failure to replicate". Journal of the Society for Psychical Research.
- ^ "Sheldrake's crystals: An exchange of views on morphogenesis leads to the conclusion that testing Sheldrake's ideas about crystallization is useless". The Skeptical Inquirer. 2002. Retrieved 20 October 2013.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help) – via HighBeam (subscription required) - ^ "Are melting points constant?". The Skeptical Inquirer. 2002. Retrieved 20 October 2013.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help) – via HighBeam (subscription required) - ^ "A Last Reply to Sheldrake". The Skeptical Inquirer. 2002. Retrieved 20 October 2013.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help) – via HighBeam (subscription required) - ^ Varela, Francisco, and Letelier, Juan C. Morphic Resonance in Silicon Chips, The Skeptical Inquirer, 1988, 289-300.
- ^ Fedanzo, A. and Wingfield, I.S. Morphic Resonance Test, The Skeptical Inquirer, Fall 1988, 100-101.
- ^ Sheldrake, R. Morphic Resonance in Silicon Chips, The Skeptical Inquirer, Winter 1989, 203-4.
- ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2007.02.018, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with
|doi=10.1016/j.asoc.2007.02.018
instead. - ^ Sheldrake, Rupert (1995). Seven experiments that could change the world: a do-it-yourself guide to revolutionary science. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.
- ^ Sheldrake, Rupert (1999). Dogs that Know When Their Owners are Coming Home: and other unexplained powers of animals. New York, NY: Crown.
- ^ Wiseman, R.; Smith, M.; Milton, J. (1998). "Can animals detect when their owners are returning home? An experimental test of the 'psychic pet' phenomenon" (pdf). British Journal of Psychology. 89(3): 453–462.
- ^ "The Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe. Podcast #126 - December 19th, 2007" @53:40: http://www.theskepticsguide.org/podcast/sgu/126 - accessed October 20, 2013
- ^ Carter, Chris (2010). ""Heads I Lose, Tails You Win", Or, How Richard Wiseman Nullifies Positive Results, and What to Do about It: A Response to Wiseman's (2010) Critique of Parapsychology" (pdf). Journal of the Society for Psychical Research.
- ^ Sheldrake, Rupert (2003). The Sense of Being Stared At: and other aspects of the extended mind. New York, NY: Crown Publishers.
- ^ Baker, R. A. (2000). "Can We Tell When Someone is Staring at Us?". Skeptical Inquirer. 24(2): 34–40.
- ^ Sheldrake, R. (March / April 2001). "Research on the Feeling of Being Stared At". Skeptical Inquirer. Volume 25.2.
{{cite journal}}
:|volume=
has extra text (help); Check date values in:|date=
(help) - ^ Baker, R. (March / April 2001). "Robert Baker Replies to Sheldrake". Skeptical Inquirer. Volume 25.2.
{{cite journal}}
:|volume=
has extra text (help); Check date values in:|date=
(help) - ^ "Sheldrake and His Critics: The Sense of Being Glared At". Journal of Consciousness Studies. 2005.
- ^ Template:Cite PMID
- ^ Marshall, Steve (2012). "The Science Delusion". Fortean Times. Vol. 286. p. 38.
{{cite magazine}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help) - ^ Pigliucci, Massimo (2010). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. University Of Chicago Press. p. 192.
- ^ Lawton, Graham (31 August 2012). "Science's greatest critic is no mood to recant". New Scientist.
- ^ Greenbank, John (July/August 2013). "The Science Delusion by Rupert Sheldrake". Philosophy Now.
{{cite journal}}
: Check date values in:|date=
(help) - ^ Midgley, Mary (27 January 2012). "The Science Delusion by Rupert Sheldrake - review". The Guardian.
- ^ Vernon, Mark (28 January 2012). "It's time for science to move on from materialism". The Guardian.
- ^ Chopra, Deepak (2 November 2012). "Science Set Free - Good News for Lumbering Robots". San Francisco Chronicle.
- ^ a b c d "Rupert Sheldrake". Heretics of Science. 19 July 1994. BBC.
- ^ "Heretics of Science". episodecalendar.com.
- ^ Rose, Steven (8 September 1994). "Heresy at stake". The Guardian. p. B11.
- ^ Highfield, Roger; Fleming, Nic (6 September 2006). "Festival attacked over paranormal 'nonsense'". The Telegraph.
- ^ a b Sharpe, Tom (20 September 2008). "Alleged assailant says he's not crazy". The Santa Fe New Mexican. Retrieved 25 March 2012.
- ^ Sharpe, Tom (5 December 2008). "Judge orders mental-health help for man who insists his mind is being controlled". Santa Fe New Mexican.
{{cite news}}
: CS1 maint: year (link) - ^ Bignell, Paul (7 April 2013). "TED conference censorship row". The Independent. Independent Print Limited.
- ^ "The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk". TED. 19 March 2013.
- ^ Sheldrake, R., & Bohm, D. (1982). "Morphogenetic fields and the implicate order". ReVision. 5: 41.
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Sokal, A. D., ed. (2000). The Sokal hoax: the sham that shook the academy. U of Nebraska Press.
- ^ Dürr, H. P. (Ed.) (1997). Rupert Sheldrake in der Diskussion. Scherz.
- ^ Wolpert, L.; Sheldrake, R. (8 July 2009). "What can DNA tell us? Place your bets now". New Scientist.
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Leviton, Mark (February 2013). "Wrong Turn: Biologist Rupert Sheldrake On How Science Lost Its Way". The Sun Magazine. Vol. 446.
- ^ Ebert, John David (Spring 1998). "From Cellular Aging to the Physics of Angels: A Conversation with Rupert Sheldrake". The Quest.
- ^ Gunther, Carl T. (2006). The Vital Dimension: A Quest for Mind, Memory and God in the Thickness of Time. Lincoln, NE: iUniverse. p. 60.
- ^ Frazier, K., ed. (1991). The Hundredth Monkey and other Paradigms of the Paranormal. Buffalo: Prometheus. p. 171.
- ^ a b Hanegraaff, Wouter Jacobus (1995). New Age religion and Western culture: esotericism in the mirror of secular thought. Universiteit Utrecht, Faculteit Godgeleerdheid. p. 352.
External links
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg/30px-Commons-logo.svg.png)
- Use dmy dates from June 2013
- All articles with faulty authority control information
- 1942 births
- English Anglicans
- Living people
- British biologists
- British non-fiction writers
- English writers on paranormal topics
- Parapsychologists
- Telepathy
- Alumni of Clare College, Cambridge
- People educated at Worksop College
- People from Newark-on-Trent