Rupert Sheldrake's New Age philosophy, peddling such notions as morphic resonance and habits of nature, is a purely theoretical product that has been very hard to undergird with empirical data. It's a blind alley in the world of theory.


BORDERING ON RELIGION

The theory has a strong kinship with physicist David Bohm's causal quantum theory that postulates a quantum field permeating the whole of cosmos. The theory predicts that if something happens in this part of the universe it immediately affects the movements of particles at the other end of the universe, as the result of the workings of a cosmic quantum field. Such a notion of extreme "non-locality" is unacceptable in scientific thinking. The theory is unacceptable also because it hypostatizes the quantum field into a form of world-enveloping spiritual force. In the Copenhagen quantum theory, the quantum field remains a theoretical model (as is the model of the particle). Sheldrake's theory suffers from the same problem of non-locality. This turns it into a philosophy bordering on religion. The memorizing morphogenetic field is akin to a spiritual being who knows what goes on in the whole universe and remembers it, too. This is really a kind of god-image. Schopenhauer talked about The Will underlying all reality, while Sheldrake introducesThe Memory which is, likewise, a spiritual being continually building reality. It's nothing wrong with religion - it's just that there exist better religious models than Sheldrake's.



REGRESSIVE THINKING

Theories of this kind, represented by Sheldrake, Bohm, et al., represent a regression from the advanced thinking of Niels Bohr, who introduced the notion of complementarity. The psychologists C.G. Jung and M-L. von Franz were enthusiastic about Bohr's paradigmatic theory and, with time, the Copenhagen model (as it's called) became more and more accepted by the scientific community while the theory was verified by innumerable experiments. Solutions that postulate spiritual fields permeating the whole of cosmos have never had any substantial support in the scientific community. Today, such theories have been ousted by Bohr's paradigm.

If one wants to dig into this kind of Neoplatonic thinking, it's much better to read the Neoplatonists themselves, or the Gnostics, because they are wonderfully alive with projections from the unconscious. It's much more rewarding. Moreover, Sheldrake tries to ride on the popularity of C.G. Jung whose notion of the collective unconscious is fundamentally different and empirically verifiable. Sheldrake's ideas are not verifiable. They represent a blind alley in the world of theory. To build a religious worldview is very good, but to give it an air of scientific thinking is destructive, both to the religious feeling and to science. The regression into obsolete thinking is a well-known phenomenon. M-L von Franz says:

The idea of complementarity in physics is the same thing. It was first created by Niels Bohr and then very much picked up and propagated by Pauli, while Louis de Broglie, for instance, for several years wrote on those lines and then regressed and suddenly said that he could not accept it any more. At the same time he became friendly with the Communists. In other words, as Pauli put it, he could not stand the newness of the thought. It was too uncanny after awhile, so he had to regress to a mechanical view, as in the Communistic sciences, and with that discard the idea of complementarity. It is so difficult to give up an old thinking habit. Even people who have got an idea already, sometimes, after awhile, give it up again. (M-L von Franz, Creation Myths, p. 219)



PANTHEISM

Sheldrake's theory follows a similar pattern. It's nothing but the good old theory of pantheism. The world-enveloping spirit permeates the material universe, and is essentially at one with it. The spirit steers the minutest particle according to his habits. God's finger is everywhere and always. Why are we attracted by such theories? It's not because they have any empirical foundation. It's because they express eternal truths, i.e., they are archetypal in character.

There is another thinker who follows this recipe of presenting archetypal great truths in New Age form (i.e. using "scientific" language). This is Ken Wilber who, resorting to a pseudo-intellectual language, presents idea after idea, in a never-ending stream. Some of his thoughts are archetypal in character and are, consequently, alluring. But these philosophers would better realize that they are high priests establishing religious cults. The scientific substance is very meagre. If they would accept their own shamanistic character, then they could fit their theories into the proud traditions of the great religious and mystical thinkers of our civilisation. Then their notions could derive a mature character. But when they try to infiltrate science, it only serves the purpose of those people who cannot stand the newness of thought in such thinkers as Bohr and Jung. These two are seedlings for the future. Let them grow in peace.

The notion that the whole universe is also a psyche which has a memory (in a sense, a cosmic brain) is an attractive thought, but it is already known to theology and comparative religion. Einstein entertained such ideas, too (see ADDENDUM). People need religion. So it's better to use these archetypes to renew the old traditions, including Christianity.



METAPHYSICAL IDEATION

The morphogenetic field is a metaphysical idea. In the traditional sciences there is a tendency to use strange spiritual notions, too, like force and energy, etc. So what's the difference? The scientists argue that the notion of energy, for example, is merely a convenient notion which facilitates mathematical calculation. So most scientists don't believe in "energy", as such, because nobody has ever seen this mysterious energy with their own eyes. Energy is used as a generic term for electricity, heat, and such things, but there exist no empirical observations of a real, generic energy.

How come they use such a notion that, after all, seems so close to the notion of "spirit" in religious thinking? The answer is that the concept is undergirded by empirical observations. Empirical reality behaves "as if" there was an "energy" underlying the phenomena. Almost as if scientists were high priests they can reason about the "Holy Law of Conservation of Energy" and argue that the potential energy is equal to the kinetic energy and set up the equation: mgy = ½mv². And what do they find? Empirical data confirms this mathematical equation all the time!

This is astounding. So here is the reason why scientists seem to adopt "spiritual" notions. Such notions help them predict observations in the empirical world. And to everybody's surprise these predictions seem to describe reality quite well. Scientists marvel at this. But still they maintain that all their notions of "field", "energy", etc., are merely for convenience. In other words, they don't hypostatize these concepts and appoint them true reality in an otherworldly sphere.

The spiritual notion of the "morphogenetic field" cannot be substantiated by empirical data. So it doesn't help in predicting the phenomena. That's the big difference. It doesn't comply with reality like the other "spiritual" notions and consequently this concept is of no use in the scientific work.



HYPOSTATIZATION

What typically happens with ideas which, for one reason or another, are not of any use in reality, is that they are hypostatized. This means that they are uplifted to an otherworldly sphere and receive true spiritual status. This is what Sheldrake does with his morphogenetic field. As he cannot undergird the notion empirically, he is forced to dogmatize it, and appoint it substantial, although immaterial, reality. Comparatively, the Greek philosopher Plato could not get any support for his grand ideas about how society should be built. So he hypostatized his whole thinking and it ended up in an otherworldly sphere among the eternal Ideas.

Scientists of today can afford not to hypostatize their ideas. This is because they are useful in empirical reality. Hence, everybody believes in their ideas anyway. So that's why they can be soft-spoken and say that these notions of ours are merely for convenience. We don't claim to know much about the unknown "X" underlying reality. But "shamans", like Sheldrake, must claim that they possess that metaphysical knowledge because there is no other way they can make people believe in these ideas. The claim is that of a metaphysical reality and a "holy morphogenetic field" underlying physical reality.



THE PHENOMENON OF MONEY

Comparatively, imagine if people would stop believing in the value of paper money. That would be catastrophic. After all, the whole system builds merely on the belief that this paper trash is actually worth something. So you can actually hand over some of it and receive a car in exchange. "What a fool", you can say afterwards, "I got a car for that worthless paper". But the point is that the salesman can, in his turn, fool somebody else and buy food, for instance. So it is very functional.

If people would lose their belief in the value of money, then the bank directors would have to step out on the terraces of their bank temples and talk pompously to the people: "Ah, this money are of similar nature as the holy spiritual Money which resides in the otherworldly sphere and where it has existed from the beginning of time. With Money the Creator bought earth from the Chaos dragon and from this earth he created the world...." And so people come to believe in money again and the world can continue spinning. This is why there existed high priests in former times. They had to encourage people to believe in their lives and in society, by pointing towards metaphysical truths. In this way order was upheld and people could go on with their lives.



ESTABLISHING ULTIMATE TRUTHS

So this is what modern shamans like Sheldrake try to do. They try to establish metaphysical truths. In Mysterium Coniunctionis CW 14, C.G. Jung comments on this: (par. 787)

If we are convinced that we know the ultimate truth concerning metaphysical things, this means nothing more than that archetypal images have taken possession of our powers of thought and feeling, so that these lose their quality as functions at our disposal. The loss shows itself in the fact that the object of perception then becomes absolute and indisputable and surrounds itself with such emotional taboo that anyone who presumes to reflect on it is automatically branded a heretic and blasphemer. (C.G. Jung, Mysterium Coniunctionis CW 14, par. 787).



ADDENDUM

Cosmologist Gustaf Strömberg conceived a theory of organisational waves or genii (sing. genie) which bears a very close resemblance to Sheldrake's theory of morphogenetic fields. Although his notions are surprisingly naive, his work was reviewed by such notabilities as Einstein and Eddington, and received appreciation. In Strömberg's book The Soul of the Universe (from the thirties) he conceives of a many-levelled structure of non-material genii which steer material particles and the morphogenesis of living beings. The indigenous structures of these genii exist independently of matter. Certain of the organisational waves function as accumulating memories in nature. So memory is a fundamental characteristic of nature. Strömberg also envisages a world-enveloping genie which he names the World Soul. The kind of genii cooperating with chromosomal genes he names gene-spirits.

Dr. Strömberg is quite honest and acknowledges that his theory is a modernized version of the Aristotelian entelechy. He also affirms the kinship with the vitalism of Hans Driesch and admits that his theory is not quite compatible with modern science as he postulates spiritual fields in nature.

His notion of organisational derivation is more complicated than Sheldrake's since not only accumulated memory is responsible of the appearance of complicated organisational waves. Strömberg devises a function where the encompassing genie splits off a structure causing an evolutional jump at the lower level. The World Soul is capable of such emissions.

It would be wholesome for Sheldrakians to acquaint themselves with Strömberg's notions because it uncovers what Sheldrake's theory really is underneath the drapery of pseudo-scientific language. It actually is very similar to Gnostic world conceptions as it builds on a duality of matter and spirit. Strömberg, however, never tries to hoodwink his readers as he readily admits the religious character of his theory. He creates a very entertaining book which revives Plotinus's World Soul. It's interesting that this idea is still alive. So I think Sheldrake ought to side with his historical forerunners rather than distancing himself from them. It's really a very old theory which has had many spokesmen, among them Dr. Strömberg.

~~~~~~~~

© M. Winther, 2001