Morphic field

[Big Bad Voodoo]

Hello dear Umers!

This thread maybe should be in science, psychology, ancient mysteries or here. I will left admins to judge.

Rupert Sheldrake is great biologist. He discover that auxin is produced by dying plant cells. Sheldrake research telepathy between animals and humans. He wrote book „Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home.“ He also wrote book „The Sense of Being Stared At“ about psychic staring effect in which he describe experiment where he concluded that people have weak sense of being stared at. Both subjects interesting. But reason I wrote this is Sheldrake theory called „Morphic field“ for which there are many critics but also scientists who see Sheldrake idea logic. For example Physicist David Bohm said that Morphic resonance fits with his concept of quantum implicate order.

Sheldrake claim that there is a field which effect structure and pattern of activity. Morphic field can influence cells. Memories are passed from one generation to another. Even explain evolution with it.

Sheldrake link Morphic field with Vedas Akashic records. (from akasha, the Sanskrit word for 'sky' 'space' or 'aether') Its library of knowledge supposedly encoded in a non-physical plane of existence known as the astral plane. Library of memories and experiences of human minds.

Morphic field is cosmos super computer. Like Bibles Book of Life. So is there any field which can influence cells? Did memories from one generation passed to next generation unconsciously?

[+ouija ouija]

I love Sheldrake's Morphic Field Theory because it explains so much ........ to me, anyway

[Big Bad Voodoo]

I love Sheldrake's Morphic Field Theory because it explains so much ........ to me, anyway

Please share your view with me. Stage is yours. I have my view but I will rather hear someone who is familiar with Sheldrake.

[Emma_Acid]

Sheldrake's work is riddled with confirmation bias. He finds the results he wants to find, and when other people review his work and don't find the same thing, he accuses them of being "materialists".

His work is unfalsifiable, and therefore unscientific.