Rupert Sheldrake Lecture: The Science Delusion

[EthanT]

Originally Posted by sbu

Johann, This is a good example from Sheldrakes book:

If a memory is stored in the brain it must have some molecular basis which you at the end of the day can reduce to bit information like 0,1,0,1. Etc, that's fine - but you will then also need to store where a particular memory is stored in order to retrieve it (a bootblock if you wish). And in this way you can into a circular argument since you then also need a memory trace to point to the location of the bootblock and so forth!

I just finished reading Sheldrake's book, myself. Really good read.

I have to agree on this too sbu. Never heard of it before either, and it is a good point he makes!

I was also really interested in hearing about some of the evidence on morphic fields, especially with the rats learning things faster.

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by EthanT

I just finished reading Sheldrake's book, myself. Really good read.

I have to agree on this too sbu. Never heard of it before either, and it is a good point he makes!

I was also really interested in hearing about some of the evidence on morphic fields, especially with the rats learning things faster.

I think when you read Ruprt Sheldrake's books, it is also important to remember (if it isn't obvious) that he is very well informed about conventional science - he was a director of studies at Cambridge University (UK) before he decided to explore more unorthodox topics.

David

[porker]

Originally Posted by David Bailey

I think when you read Ruprt Sheldrake's books, it is also important to remember (if it isn't obvious) that he is very well informed about conventional science - he was a director of studies at Cambridge University (UK) before he decided to explore more unorthodox topics.

David

In my day director of studies was an administrative rather than an academic position?.

[Sandy B]

Originally Posted by porker

In my day director of studies was an administrative rather than an academic position?.

In my experience, it's usually a job done by a tenured prof with other academic duties as well.

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by porker

In my day director of studies was an administrative rather than an academic position?.

That was partially true, but people in those positions got there as a result of previous work, and did research as well.

David

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by richrf

Questions that arise:

1) If humans are simply complex mechanisms does the same hold true for the entire Universe? If so, does the Universe have a brain? How does one distinguish a complex from a non-complex mechanism?

Exactly - the supposed explanations of consciousness are so vague that they do not answer such questions!

2) If human consciousness is an illusion of matter, that what is having the illusion? Can inert matter have illusions? Can a piece of glass have an illusion?

I have asked this many times!

3) Everything seems to be always changing? Even our understanding of scientific laws? If everything is always changing, from where do we get the idea that an scientific law is a law? What is creating this illusion?

4) If nature is purposeless, why does it seem that we are always trying to do something? Even answer a post?

5) What is the nature of inheritance and how does something called a gene carry it? Magic?

Sheldrake says that genes just supply a blueprint for proteins - which is exactly in accordance with the scientific facts - they don't provide a blueprint for the organism.

6) What is consciousness or unconsciousness? What has consciousness and what doesn't? e.g.

The Gut - The Second Brain

I believe that I share with Sheldrake the desire (purpose) to sometimes step back and re-examine all beliefs whether they are religious, scientific, or otherwise. Beliefs create comfort but discomfort creates something new.

I'm not in total accord with Sheldrake, because he decided to become a Christian, but generally I have a lot of sympathy with his stance.

The Science Delusion is well worth reading, and it contains some new and rather interesting observations about mass and energy conservation (or not).

David

[Open Mind]

richrf, I enjoyed reading your first post .... welcome to forum.

[EthanT]

Originally Posted by David Bailey

I'm not in total accord with Sheldrake, because he decided to become a Christian

David

David,

Do you have any references where he talks about this? I'd be interested in hearing what he has to say there.

Thanks!

[porker]

Originally Posted by David Bailey

That was partially true, but people in those positions got there as a result of previous work, and did research as well.

David

I realise that academia is sadly going down the route of "management" but I am afraid that this still doesn't suggest to me anything of research based value...

Don't get me wrong, I find Sheldrake a charming and entertaining speaker, I just find hid ideas somewhat misguided.

[jumbo]

Originally Posted by porker

I realise that academia is sadly going down the route of "management" but I am afraid that this still doesn't suggest to me anything of research based value...

Don't get me wrong, I find Sheldrake a charming and entertaining speaker, I just find hid ideas somewhat misguided.

Sheldrake was Research Fellow of the Royal Society. This means that his research was considered top quality by his peers. He was also fellow of Clare college Cambridge.