Nature's Hidden Intelligence: Morphic Fields | Rupert Sheldrake PhD

Summary

Highlights

• Morphic fields could be the missing link in heritability beyond genetic explanations 🔗.
• Rupert Sheldrake challenges the materialistic approach to consciousness and inheritance 🔄.
• Science could integrate more with spirituality by recognizing the benefits of spiritual practices ✨.
• Morphic resonance explains collective memories and habitual knowledge within species 🔄.
• Experiments show rats and chemicals might learn and stabilize faster through morphic resonance 🐀.
• Contemporary science often overlooks the limitations of fixed laws of nature, which could evolve or change 📜.
• The brain acts as a tuning system rather than a storage site for memories and thoughts 🎶.

Key Takeaways

• Morphic fields contribute to a species' collective memory, affecting behavior and form 🧠.
• Traditional genes can't fully explain heritability, highlighting the need for alternative concepts like morphic resonance 🧬.
• Conventional scientific paradigms often resist change, advocating fixed laws unlike nature's evolving habits 🌿.
• Spiritual practices have measurable benefits, suggesting a potential synergy with scientific exploration 🙏.
• Consciousness might extend beyond the brain, hinting at a broader, more inclusive understanding of the mind 🌐.

Overview

Chapters

• 00:00 - 10:00: Introduction to Morphic Fields The chapter "Introduction to Morphic Fields" discusses the limitations of genetics in explaining certain heritable traits and conditions. It highlights the 'missing heritability problem,' where the predictive power of genomes is significantly lower than expected, accounting for only 5% to 10% of the variance in traits such as proneness to breast cancer or schizophrenia. The text suggests that morphic fields might account for the unexplained portion of heritability, filling in the gaps left by genetic explanations.
• 10:00 - 20:00: Morphic Resonance and Heritability This chapter explores the concept of morphic resonance, proposing that each species possesses a collective memory of form, instinct, and behavior. It challenges the traditional view by suggesting that the laws of nature are more akin to habits rather than rigid rules. Conventional biology often emphasizes genes and molecular biology, assuming they interact in complex ways to create self-assembled structures, similar to assuming a house will build itself from raw materials.
• 20:00 - 30:00: Mechanistic Materialism vs. Morphic Fields This chapter explores the concept of mechanistic materialism and contrasts it with the concept of morphic fields. It suggests that just as a house needs an architectural plan to be built, so do living organisms need morphic fields to shape their form and behavior. The chapter further delves into the idea that our minds extend beyond our physical brains, interacting with and influenced by these morphic fields. However, the exact workings and mechanisms of these fields remain a topic of inquiry.
• 30:00 - 40:00: Empirical Testing and Scientific Paradigm The chapter discusses the concept of morphic resonance, initially considered a hunch or hypothesis, and explores various attempts to explain it. Notably, Quantum physicist David Bohm suggested that morphic resonance might operate through what he termed the 'implicate order,' a hidden order underlying quantum processes. The discussion highlights the tension between this idea and the mechanistic materialism of the current scientific paradigm.
• 40:00 - 50:00: Nature's Organization and Collective Memories This chapter explores the idea that nature is more like an organism than a machine. It begins with a critique of viewing nature inadequately as a machine and suggests considering it as a living entity. The narrative also introduces a personal touch by mentioning a shared interest in music between the speaker and an interviewee, who are both piano and organ players. This personal connection is briefly linked to larger existential questions, such as God's creation of the world.
• 50:00 - 60:00: Implications for Science and Education The chapter discusses the fondness for 'B's music among the speakers, focusing on their personal experiences and preferences related to the music. One speaker mentions playing 'Bar's music on the piano, with the conversation hinting at a shared appreciation for this composer, although there is a moment of confusion over whether they meant Bach or another composer entirely. The dialogue conveys a personal engagement with 'B's music and reflects on its impact or significance to them without delving into broader implications for science and education.
• 60:00 - 62:00: Closing Statements The chapter titled 'Closing Statements' features a conversation with a person who has a notable background in science. The speaker began their career as a biologist, studying biology and sciences at Cambridge. They further pursued history and philosophy of science at Harvard. The content hints at a focus on sharing personal history and research interests, possibly to introduce or conclude a broader discussion.

Nature's Hidden Intelligence: Morphic Fields | Rupert Sheldrake PhD Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 the missing heritability problem  it was a huge shock for molecular   biologists because they thought genes would  explain everything and they don't proness to   breast cancer or liability to become  schizophrenia or things like that on   the basis of genomes the predicted power was  very low The genome could only predict 5% or 10% I I think that a lot of what is not explained  by genes is in fact explained by morphic
• 00:30 - 01:00 resonance each species has a collective memory  of form and Instinct and behavior the whole of   Nature has an inherent memory uh the so-called  laws of nature are more like habits the normal   view in biology is to focus almost all attention  on genes and molecular biology and then is simply   assumed that by complex interactions they'll  self assemble it's like saying the house will
• 01:00 - 01:30 just build itself if you just shake up the  building materials that's not how it works a   house has an architectural plan so I think that's  the role that the morphic field plays shaping form   the behavior what is the role of the brain in  the context of morphic field Theory I think   our minds stretch out like Fields far beyond our  brains how does it work do we really know or it's
• 01:30 - 02:00 a hunch still it's a postulate a hypothesis there  have been various people who attempted to explain   it for example David bone the well-known Quantum  physicist uh thought that morphic resonance could   work through what he called the implicate order  which is a hidden order that underlies Quantum   processes what I'm arguing you see is that the  mechanistic materialism the current paradigm
• 02:00 - 02:30 is inadequate uh what we need is a view of nature  as alive nature is more like an an organism than a machine hello rert welcome and thank you very much  for taking the time for this interview before we   dive into main topics I wanted to ask you uh  from a piano player like myself to you who is   also a piano player and an organ player there um  would you agree that God's creation of the world
• 02:30 - 03:00 was to The Sound of bak's Music well I wasn't  there to see it so I I couldn't tell I couldn't   be sure about that but I love B's music and indeed  I've been playing some of Bar's music this morning   so um that's mainly what I play on the piano  excellent me too so I would say that your favorite   composer is the same as mine which is b or would  did you say Mozart or purel oh they definitely b
• 03:00 - 03:30 b we are B people all right um well in my humble  opinion you need no introduction but perhaps for   people who are new on the blog you could just  say a few words about your background and your   main research interest well I've started out my um  scientific work as a biologist I studied biology   now Sciences at Cambridge I did history and  philosophy of science at Harvard uh before I went
• 03:30 - 04:00 back to Cambridge to do a PhD which was on plant  development I was then a research fellow of the   Royal Society and a fellow of Cl College Cambridge  where I did research on the plant hormone oxin aux   i n oxin which is chemically indol latic acid  um I worked out how it's made in Plants it's   made by dying cells it's released as cells break  down and how it's transported in Plants the the
• 04:00 - 04:30 mechanism of the Polar oxen transport system  oxen moves from the choots towards the root   tips um and it's a polar transport system it only  goes in One Direction then I worked in India in   agricultural Research Institute called IET where  I was working on the physiology of tropical leg   human crops particularly chickpea and pigeon  pea um then all that time I was thinking about
• 04:30 - 05:00 the nature of biological development and the  nature of morphogenetic fields fields which   shape form um and then in in I wrote a book on  on this in India I left my job for a while and   lived in small ashram in a Christian ashram in  Tamil Nadu with song called father be Griffith
• 05:00 - 05:30 um English Benedictine uh Mark and then I  I the book was published in 1981 called a   new science of Life putting forward my ideas on  morphic resonance and then um I've been working   on morphic resonance ever since then but also  on other areas of science that are relatively   controversial like telepathy um and the feeling  of being stared at really uh topics which are to
• 05:30 - 06:00 do with the extended mind the mind being more  extensive than the brain so I would say that   most of my work for the last 40 years or so has  been on Minds being extended Beyond brains both   in space through vision for example and in time  through memory um which is where morphic resonance   comes in so I basically do research in areas of  biology and psychology uh experimental research
• 06:00 - 06:30 uh which are neglected by many scientists but  which I think are very important for pointing   towards a better understanding of Consciousness  interesting I have a book of yours which is one of   the early editions and if you permit me I'll just  uh quote something yes so the book is entitled   the presence of the past morphic resonance  and the habits of Nature and here you're
• 06:30 - 07:00 right that living organisms inherit genes from  their ancestors according to the hypothesis of   formative causation they also inherit morphic  Fields heredity depends both on genes and on   morphic resonance so what is morphic resonance and  what is morphic Fields Theory and most importantly   what does this theory explain that genes evolution  by natural selection and epigenetics do not all
• 07:00 - 07:30 right well those are a lot of questions um  basically morphic resonance is the idea that   there's a memory in nature the whole of Nature  has an inherent memory uh the so-called laws   of nature are more like habits um each species  has a collective memory of form and Instinct and   behavior and so how morphic resonance works  I think is on the basis of similarity similar
• 07:30 - 08:00 vibratory patterns in self-organizing systems  um lead to Resonance across time and space so   that a present system Tunes in bimorphic  resonance to similar systems in the past   which convey a memory to it so the in the in the  um animal species each species would thus have
• 08:00 - 08:30 a collective memory um every young Antelope for  example would be tuning into the U Behavior and   the form of previous antelopes of the same  species uh tuning into a kind of collective   memory humans do the same um and and I think I  think what y called the collective unconscious   uh is best understood in ter terms of morphic  resonance and Collective memory because morphic
• 08:30 - 09:00 resonance depends on similarity U it leads to  a number of surprising predictions and one of   them is if we think about our own memory uh if  we ask the question who is most similar to me in   the past then the answer is me I'm more similar  to myself in the past than to anyone else and   the most specific resonance working on me from  the past is from my own past and I think that
• 09:00 - 09:30 U normal memory when I remember what happened  yesterday or when I was a child um as well as   habit memory remembering how to ride a bicycle or  drive a car or play tennis or play the piano um I   think all these forms of memory depend on morphic  resonance I don't think they're stored as material   traces in the brain now most scientists just take  it for granted that me must be stored inside the
• 09:30 - 10:00 brain as material tracers uh even though these  tracers haven't actually been found despite a   century or more of looking for them um because  they think that's the only possible way memory   could work well actually there is another way  and there's morphic resonance and I think it   makes more sense of the phenomena of memory  now when we come to biological form the idea of   morphogenetic fields or form shaping Fields was  first put forward in the 1920s by developmental
• 10:00 - 10:30 biologists and since then uh it's been a minority  view within biology but it's been a very important   view uh because it gives a holistic approach  to understanding the development of form of an   animal embryo or of a plant as it develops um the  probably the leading proponent of morphogenetic   fields who's working in contemporary biology  is the American biologist Michael Levin uh who
• 10:30 - 11:00 speaks very well on the subject of morphogenetic  fields these fields are top- down causal systemes   as a leaf develops for example I think there's as  it were an invisible mold or patent for the leaf   that shapes the developing Leaf uh and as Fields  they're intrinsically holistic a magnetic field   for examp example is completely holistic uh you  can't take a slice out of a magnetic field like
• 11:00 - 11:30 you take a slice out of a cake um and if you  cut a magnet a bar Magnus in half you don't get   half a magnet two halves of a magnet you get  two small but complete magnets each with its   own field and so I think morphogenetic fields are  like that and they shape developing organisms form
• 11:30 - 12:00 but the inheritance of morphogenetic fields um  doesn't depend on genes now this was the problem   I was wrestling with in Cambridge when I first  thought of the idea of morphic resonance how   might these fields be inherited um genes can't  explain the holistic development of form because   genes are all about coding for the sequence of  amino acids and proteins uh they give us the   right proteins they give every organism the right  proteins and some genes are involved in switching
• 12:00 - 12:30 on or switching off other genes uh which mean that  they either make or don't make particular protein   some epigenetic uh forms of inheritance involve  uh switching on or switching off genes which are   inherited so an organism can inherit a pattern  of genes being switched on or off from their   ancestors depending on what's happened to the  ancestors how they've adapted to their environment
• 12:30 - 13:00 or how they've learned a particular U new skill or  form of behavior so morphogenetic fields are one   kind of what I call morphic Fields morphic field  is like a genus of which morphic morphogenetic   fields are a species morphogenetic fields are  the morphic fields concerned with the development   and form in animals and plants and microbes um  behavioral fields are the fields concerned with
• 13:00 - 13:30 the organization of behavior and the activity  of the nervous system um which underly animal   behavior mental fields are the fields that underly  mental activity social fields are the fields that   underly social behavior like flocks of birds or  schools of fish or termite colonies um all these   kinds are field are kind all different kinds of  morphic field and morphic Fields have the common
• 13:30 - 14:00 property of being shaped by morphic resonance  having an inherent memory from the past so now   coming to the point about genes and how they're  in adequate for explaining inheritance what genes   do as I've already pointed out is code for  the sequence of amino acids in proteins and   some code for switching on or switching off other  genes and some code for RNA which is involved in
• 14:00 - 14:30 ribosomes and other structures in the cell and of  course messenger RNA which is for making proteins   so genes are all about protein synthesis and the  control of protein synthesis now making the right   proteins is very important for an organism but  it's not enough it's like if you're building a   house you need the right building materials cement  mortar Timber tiles for the roof and so forth um
• 14:30 - 15:00 but having the right building materials doesn't  give you a house just having those delivered to   a building site uh doesn't create the house and  the normal view in biology is to focus almost all   the attention on genes and molecular biology how  you get the right molecules and then it's simply   assumed that by complex interactions they'll self  assemble into a cell or into a tissue or an organ   ISM but that's simply an assumption and nobody  knows how it works and they just say Well it
• 15:00 - 15:30 happens by mechanisms not yet fully understood  well it's like saying the house will just build   itself if you just shake up the building materials  um enough that's not how it works a house has an   architectural plan which is more like an idea than  the thing um I mean you normally it's written down   on paper um but it could just be an idea in the  mind of the Builder not a physical observable
• 15:30 - 16:00 thing at all and yet that's what shapes the  structure of the house and with the same building   materials you can build houses of different  plants and different forms so I think that's   the role that the morphic field plays shaping  form the behavior and in the 1980s when I first   proposed the idea of morphic resonance and when  I wrote about its role in inheritance like in my   the presence of the past as you just quoted um  there was tremendous opposition to this idea
• 16:00 - 16:30 because everyone was convinced that genes would  explain everything the Human Genome Project was   launched in 1987 um and the idea was that by  coding by decoding the Genome of humans we'd   understand human nature in molecular detail uh  we'd know everything we needed to know about   hereditary human nature in fact when the  Human Genome Project was accomplished in
• 16:30 - 17:00 the year 2000 um it turned out to be a tremendous  disappointment first of all there were far fewer   genes than anyone expected they expected about  100 thousands in fact they're only about 20,000   and we have fewer genes than a sein or and about  less than half as many as a rice plant so uh it   wasn't at all what people expected and then when  people tried to predict uh human characteristics
• 17:00 - 17:30 like proness to bre breast cancer or liability  to become schizophrenic or things like that on   the basis of genomes the predicted power was very  low The genome could only predict 5% or 10% of the   inheritance of of these and other characteristics  whereas it was known that 80 or 90% could be
• 17:30 - 18:00 inherited but the dreams could only explain 5  to 10% and the rest of what was inherited came   to be called The Missing heritability problem it  was a huge shock for molecular biologist because   they thought genes would explain everything and  they don't um so I I think that a lot of what   is not explained by genes is in fact explained by  morphic resonance in the 198 80s people thought I
• 18:00 - 18:30 was being outrageous when I said that genes were  grossly overrated and couldn't possibly explain   most aspects of inheritance um and that's one  reason Mor resonance was such a controversial   idea at the time it's still controversial of  course uh but the idea that there could be   another form of inheritance over and above genes  seem to most people impossible whereas now um we   desperately need an understanding inheritance that  goes beyond genes some people think that this can
• 18:30 - 19:00 be explained by epigenetic inheritance it's now  known that characteristics acquired by plants   or animals as they adapt to their environment um  can actually be inherited this is the so-called   inheritance of acquired characteristics and  in 20th century biology in the west this was   considered the ultimate heresy lamaran inheritance  uh as proposed by Lamar in around 1800 uh it was
• 19:00 - 19:30 considered to be uh completely tical because all  heredity was supposed to be genetic interestingly   in the Soviet Union under TD lenko the inheritance  of acquired characters was Orthodox um and that   made it even more controversial in the west and  and taboo because um it became tied up with a cold   war so there was a kind of cold war in biology as  well however around the year 2000 the evidence for
• 19:30 - 20:00 the inheritance for acquired characters became  overwhelming and it was rebranded epigenetic   inheritance and is now a major research field  within biology most people assume that this   inheritance required characters can be explained  by modifications to the expression of gen   inheriting genes being switched on or Switched Off  through things like methylation of the DNA or of
• 20:00 - 20:30 hisone proteins associated with it um but actually  I think a lot of what is branded epigenetic   inheritance is actually a form of morphic  resonance so I think morphic resonance leads   to the inheritance of required characters just  as it's now known to happen and there may well be   inherited epigenetic molecular changes but I think  a lot of this inheritance is in fact due to morphe
• 20:30 - 21:00 Resonance do we know the actual mechanism because  you say resonance resonance so it means it must   resonate right but how does it work do we really  know or it's a hunch still oh no one knows how   it works um it's a postulate a hypothesis the  hypothesis is that this happens now exactly   how it happens nobody knows there have been  various people whove attempted to explain
• 21:00 - 21:30 it for example David B the well-known Quantum  physicist uh thought that morphic resonance could   work through what he called the implicate order  which is a hidden order that underlies Quantum   processes um and affects the probabilities  of events happening at the quantum level um   Bernard Carr who is a British theatrical  physicist thinks that morphic resonance
• 21:30 - 22:00 may work through some of the extra Dimensions  that are present in super string or M Theory in   modern theoretical physics they have 10 or 11  Dimensions one of time and the others of space   and he thinks these additional spatial Dimensions  could allow for these kinds of connections based   on similarity that I'm talking about but hardly  anyone understand super String Theory so if
• 22:00 - 22:30 somebody says well you know what's the mechanism  I say well here's super String Theory pages and   pages of impenetrable equations um most people  aren't actually going to be any of the wiser uh   as a result of this so I myself don't understand  pages and pages of equations so I don't bother too   much about these theoretical models because for me  the important thing is the empirical question does
• 22:30 - 23:00 it really happen um and doing experimental tests  to see if morphic resonance really does happen   seems to be the priority if it can be established  uh Beyond reasonable doubt that it's really going   on uh then I think a lot of theoretical physicists  and others would try and come up with models for   it and we might not end up with a single model  I mean after all when Faraday postulated the   electric and the mag magnetic fields in the 1840s  he had no idea how they worked and then Maxwell
• 23:00 - 23:30 came along 20 years later with his equations of  electromagnetism uh Maxwell's equations which   treated light as a vibration in the ether as an  electromagnetic vibration in The Ether subtle   matter then Einstein came along in 20 1905 in  the special theory of relativity said there's   no such thing as The Ether um it's just fields  and then Quantum electrodynamics came along and
• 23:30 - 24:00 said oh well this is quantum vacuum field and  electromagnetic phenomena depend on Virtual   photons that appear and disappear from invisible  field so theories of something as straightforward   as light have changed a lot over the last 150  years um and so I don't think that even if there   was a physical theory of how morphic resonance  works it probably wouldn't be the last word and
• 24:00 - 24:30 new theories might come along so that's why I mean  I I'm an empirical Scientist by Nature I mean I   like doing experiments which is why I think that  the primary question at the moment is what sort   of phenomena does morphic resonance happen in  and in in what ways can it actually be detected   so what are the key examples you mentioned  already some U of the morphic fields the most
• 24:30 - 25:00 striking and most obvious maybe in your view you  mean of morphic resonance um morphic resonance   and types of morphic fields you mentioned some  of them already well the thing is that I think   that morphogenetic fields which shape developing  organisms um probably have an electrical component   to them Michael Levan at T has shown that in  developing tadpoles for example there are electric
• 25:00 - 25:30 Fields over the whole organism and I think that's  the morphogenetic field expresses itself through   these electric Fields um but in terms of morphic  resonance the memory principle I think the most   striking examples are rats learning a new trick  when rats were train trained to escape from water   maze in the long series of experiments at Harvard  they got better and better at it and then because
• 25:30 - 26:00 this looked like a inheritance for acquired  characters which was very controversial people   in Edinburgh University and Melbourne Australia  um university uh did the same experiments their   rats learned much quicker than the Harvard rats  they took up where the Harvard ones had left   off and the researchers in Australia showed that  this Improvement continued uh the more rats that   learned the trick the easier it got for others to  learn it and this was not just rats descended from
• 26:00 - 26:30 parents who'd learned the trick but other Rats of  the same breed also got better now that I think   is a very good example of morphic resonance  also in chemistry if you make new chemical   compounds for the first time they're very hard to  crystallize and I think that's because there isn't   a morphogenetic field for that Crystal it hasn't  happened yet um chemists often have to wait months
• 26:30 - 27:00 or years before the first Crystal forms but after  it's formed it gets easier and easier all around   the world to crystallize the same compound uh the  more often it's made chemists recognize this but   they just assume it must be because of fragments  of previous crystals being wafted around the world   in the atmosphere is invisible dust particles what  I'm saying is the same would happen even when you   filter out invisible dust particles and to take  a contemporary example which uh is the subject
• 27:00 - 27:30 of research at the moment in Britain there's a a  student doing a project on this right now as we   speak um if you take the word puzzle Wordle it's  a felter word puzzle published every day by the   New York Times um the word puzzle is solved in a  given day by millions of people I would predict   that the word puzzle would be harder to do in  the morning when it's just been published than
• 27:30 - 28:00 in the evening when millions of people around the  world already done it and indeed uh the student   who's called Georgia black has uh actually found  that people do in fact find it easy to get Wordle   right the first time or the second time um as  the day goes on um so that looks as if more   could be working that of course in the real  life experiments life sort of messy because
• 28:00 - 28:30 people could be cheating and one would need  to do more rigorous experiments but the fact   the fact that this seems to be happening with  wle is particularly interesting because one   of the things I predicted years ago is that it  should be easier to do the Times crossw puzzle   the day after it's published and the day it is  published because so many people would have done   it as should make it easier for others to do and  quite a number of people who do serious crosswords
• 28:30 - 29:00 have actually found that and there was even uh  an experiment with crossword puzzles here in   England uh showing that yes they did seem to get  easier to do after many people had done them so   morphe resonance can be tested in many different  ways in the chemical realm in in the biological   realm through inheritance um and also in in the  realm of human learning through things like word
• 29:00 - 29:30 puzzles so what I'm hearing you saying is that  actually we cannot study morphic Fields directly   or morphogenetic fields or morphic resonance  we can only study the effects of of those right   yes there isn't a way to measure it because for  example you know NASA just measured for the first   time the global electric field of the earth and  that's a theory which is 60 years old but we only
• 29:30 - 30:00 managed to measure it for the first time just just  now recently like last month or something do you   think morphic Fields will ever be measured as such  well I think you can measure them um the thing is   you measure fields are measured through Fields  themselves if you want to measure an electric   field you don't use a pendulum like you'd use to  measure a gravitational field or or um you use an   meter if you want a magnetic field you  use a magnetic meter if you're measuring
• 30:00 - 30:30 a gravitational field you use a torsion thing or  or some pendulum system where you're looking at   the attraction between masses you don't do it  electrically you can't measure a gravitational   field with electric meter um and so you  can't measure a morphogenetic field with a   gravitational detector or detector or an electric  field except in so far as the morphogenetic field   affects the electric field but you're not  measuring it directly we always measure
• 30:30 - 31:00 Fields through their effects um we don't measure  the field directly we measure the electrical   field through its effect on some electrically  charged particle or we measuring a magnetic   field throughs effect on a magnet for example  the Earth magnetic field we measure through a   little magnet which is the compass needle um we're  not measuring the Earth's magnetic field through   uh through say a thermometer you you have to  measure it through the right kind of thing so
• 31:00 - 31:30 if you want to study the morphogenetic field  of um the involved in the development of a   plant then you could measure the strength of the  field by having large numbers of plants modified   in a particular way adapting to a particular  environment and then seeing um how strong the   effect is Al take the rat example um if you have  rats that are getting better at learning a maze
• 31:30 - 32:00 the strength of the field depends on how many have  already learned it so if there's a thousand rats   have learned it the effect should be stronger than  if only 10 rats have learned it and so you'd see   rats learning it more quickly after a thousand  than after 10 had learned it before and that   would give you a measurement of the strength of  the field you could plot it on the gr the number   of rats that have Lear Le it versus the speed at  which new rats learn it um so you can measure them
• 32:00 - 32:30 but you have to measure them through Mor morphic  effects rather than through electric meters or thermometers do you know that in Japan um they  use physarum algorithm and and that's something   uh which was developed by biologist Professor  toshiyuki nakagaki who I'm not really my Japanese   not really up these days uh and what he's done he  used he used mazes slime mold and sugar and um so
• 32:30 - 33:00 he he let the mold F in the Maze uh going from one  end to another seeking sugar on the other side and   the first thing the first thing uh what happens  the mold filling up completely the entire Maze   and then it starts retracting and it retracts  and it removes itself from every dead end and
• 33:00 - 33:30 and suboptimal Route so he ended up several times  with absolutely optimal uh you know path from one   end to another in the Maze and so they developed  they studied that they developed phm algorithm   they call it and they use it to optimize the  National Railway Network because it's cheaper   it's more effective and more ingenious um I  don't know if you've heard of this example so   is there is there a way to explain this through  the point of view from the point of view of
• 33:30 - 34:00 morphic or Mor morphogenetics of resonance well I  mean in in that kind of experiment you see one of   the things that slime molds and also fungi can  do and this is something my son Merlin writes   about in his book on fungi entangled life um they  they can Branch out in many different directions   all at once I mean an animal if it's in a maze  say a fruit fly it reaches a junction it can
• 34:00 - 34:30 any go one way left or right but if it's a mold  or a slime mold it can go both ways all at once   and then find the answer and then retract or  dissolve the other branches now that's I mean   it's basically I suppose to start with trial or  error just exploring all possibilities then you   find something that works and then concentrate  on that um what I'd like to know in relation to   the fusarium experiments is when they did exactly  the same experiment again and again did the did
• 34:30 - 35:00 they learn quicker on subsequent trials now you  see that morphe resence might then be involved   if they now learn quicker and could adapt faster  unfortunately most scientists when they do their   experiments are based they base it on the hidden  assumption within science that nature is governed   by eternal laws this was built into science as an  assumption in the 17th century and it's basically
• 35:00 - 35:30 a version of the platonic philosophy that there's  an Ultimate Reality out there that's mathematical   it never changes it's beyond space and time and  it influences everything in the universe at all   places in all at all times um and therefore  when you do an experiment uh if you do it   again another time it should be exactly the  same the results because the laws of nature   don't change every scientific experiment should  in principle be repeatable indefinitely and not
• 35:30 - 36:00 depend on what's happened in the past and because  most scientists just take that for granted they're   not even aware that it's an assumption it's just  so much the common sense of science is part of   the Eternal law Paradigm which is built into the  foundations of contemporary science um that when   they do an experiment over and over again instead  of looking carefully to see if it happens quicker   as time goes on they just assume that it's the  same uh and if it does get quicker they assume
• 36:00 - 36:30 it's just them getting better doing the experiment  through experience and people often find they do   get easier to do and the experiments things do  happen faster but when they're doing research   they're not looking for morphic resonance effect  and so they always explain way these findings by   saying oh well it must has have been us um this is  I one example of this is in chemistry um I predict
• 36:30 - 37:00 that because of morphic resonance when you make  a new Crystal as time goes on the crystal become   more and more stable as a result of morphic  resonance from previous crystals of the same   kind and because it's more stable it would be hard  to break harder to break it up and how you break   up crystals is by heating them and the point  at which they break up is called the melting   point so I predict that new compounds should show  gradually increasing melting points as time goes
• 37:00 - 37:30 on now most chemists assume that melting points  are physical constants in fact they're printed in   books called handbooks of physical constants but  when you look at n libraries science libraries or   online resources at these physical constant U  reference works um they're continually updated   you know the the CRC Handbook of physical  constants is like the 45th Edition and the
• 37:30 - 38:00 reason they're outdated is because the constants  actually change and new ones come new one new   chemicals come along um and actually the melting  points do go up um you know the vast majority   of chemicals newly formed chemicals the melting  points do rise I I've found this by looking into   the history of melting points and I've uh several  chemists have helped me with this research um so
• 38:00 - 38:30 then when you say chemists look these melting  points are actually changing they're going up   they say oh that's just because we're getting  better at making the chemicals you know the   impurities is lower the melting point and so we  must be getting pure and purer samples that have   higher melting points you say well how do you  know they're pure they well they must be pure   they've got higher melting points so you see  they they don't just don't think in terms of   trying to look at the same phenomenon under  exactly the same conditions repeatedly which
• 38:30 - 39:00 is why I think morphic resonance is going on in  the bares all the time but frustratingly people   simply don't notice it um um so one the things  I try and do is encourage people working in   Laboratories where they're studying new chemicals  or new materials or new Quantum systems which   are actually Material Science and solid state  physics is one of the most exciting areas of   current physics people are continually developing  new superconducting systems or with new physical
• 39:00 - 39:30 macroscopic Quantum properties and I think if they  look uh if they do exactly the same experiment   repeatedly they should see the process speeding  up or happening more easily um and the I think the   data are already there in lots of Laboratories but  people simply don't look at it through this lens
• 39:30 - 40:00 are there laws of nature you mentioned laws of  nature or maybe well are there any constants at   all because or is just Tendencies and habits of  nature because when I was at school it was all   very clear solid you know you measure you get the  result it's all the same you know and they're are   hard laws of nature you just have to learn them  yes that's it well that's the standard assumption   you see since the 17th century there are laws of  nature and but actually when you think about it
• 40:00 - 40:30 uh the whole concept of laws of nature is very  very questionable to start with it's incredibly   anthropocentric um here in Britain one of the  founders of modern science was s Francis Bacon   and Sir Francis Bacon was one of the first  people in the early 17th century to speak   about the laws of nature and the role of Science  in finding that well Francis Bacon's day job was   was Lord Chancellor of England he was a lawyer  and so naturally the metaphor of law came to
• 40:30 - 41:00 him uh the idea just as the king of England could  make up new laws and and and the Lord Chancellor   could help enforce them and interpret them so  the ruler of the universe God made up laws of   nature and because God was all powerful and was  the cosmic police force but nothing could disobey   the laws of nature um they were just rigidly had  to follow the laws of nature as totally obedient
• 41:00 - 41:30 to the laws of nature or matter the whole universe  that was the metaphor so it's obviously highly   anthropomorphic but if you think through the  metaphor the fact is the laws of England change   and the laws of everywhere else change um and in  fact in England the laws depend on common law some   of them depend on you know what we call common  law depending not on what laws being passed by   Kings or Parliament but on precedents if a judge  finds a particular judgment in a particular case
• 41:30 - 42:00 then that judgment is cited in subsequent cases  because it sets a precedent and a lot of our law   is based on common law it's based on custom or  tradition um it's different from the Continental   System of Napoleonic law um where you have  a kind of codified code Napoleon you know   where all the laws are codified hied and so on in  England they've evolved and the laws of even the
• 42:00 - 42:30 code Napoleon I mean was started under Napoleon  it's not as if it was the law of the French law   forever um so even that has a of course a history  and French laws and been modified ever since that   Cod was put forward so I think that the uh if we  actually think through the metaphor of laws they   evolve they change with time and Circumstance  so the idea of aernal and fixed is a violation
• 42:30 - 43:00 of the very concept of law as we actually know it  um but then the other thing is you see it's hugely   anthropocentric because only humans have laws and  in fact tribal societies have Customs they don't   have codified laws only civilized societies have  laws so it's a highly anthropocentric metaphor   um and I think the metaphor of habit is much more  natural I mean we have habits animals have habits
• 43:00 - 43:30 even crystals have habits crystallographers speak  about Crystal habits um so um habits are very very   widespread in nature laws are not so I think  evolving habits make much more sense than fixed   laws and then of course the idea of constant which  you mentioned that again is it's assumed that the   laws and constants of nature were all LED done  at the moment of the big bang that somehow at the
• 43:30 - 44:00 very moment of the Big Bang about 13 billion years  ago um suddenly out of nowhere the entire universe   came into existence all the matter and energy  in the universe and all the laws that govern it   suddenly appeared and they've never changed since  um that's the standard scientific assumption as my   friend Terence McKenna used to say the modern  Science is based on the principle give us   one free miracle and we'll explain the rest and  this is the one free Miracle all the matter and
• 44:00 - 44:30 energy in the universe suddenly appears from  nowhere um and all the laws that govern it and   uh and the constants the speed of light the charge  on the electron uh the fine structure constant the   big the gravitational constant Big G um all these  constants are supposed to be fixed well um how do   we know if you actually measure these constants  uh they change all the time which is why you
• 44:30 - 45:00 have ever new editions of handbooks of physical  constants Big G varies quite a lot the Newton's   gravitational constant by as much as 1% in recent  decades U these things are supposed to be defined   to many places of decimals um and so when they  they vary the normal Assumption of physicist is   to say oh well the previous ones must have been  measuring errors and the new one is the latest
• 45:00 - 45:30 best value and stuff and then five or 10 years  later there's a new best value comes along um so   all of this you see is just pure assumption that  the laws and the constants are fixed and then it   leads to a tissue of speculation which obsesses  cosmologists and people who follow Popular Science   if all the laws and constants were fixed at the  moment of the Big Bang why were they fixed in   exactly the right way for us to exist for life  to appear the laws could have been different the
• 45:30 - 46:00 constants could have been different and if they  were the universe would never have given rise to   carbon atoms to life on Earth etc etc this the  anthropic principle the cosmological anthropic   principle um so people say well then if they're  exactly right for us and all these things have   completely fine-tuned exactly right then either  there must be a kind of engineering God who's
• 46:00 - 46:30 outside the universe who fine-tunes the knobs  the constants and everything before he presses   the start button for the Big Bang which is a kind  of neoism a kind of 18th century machine making   god um outside the universe which then proceeds  automatically once it's been started um or they   say Well there must be billions trillions of  actual universes we just exist in the one that's
• 46:30 - 47:00 right for us as the only one we can actually know  but all the others actually exist and then you say   to why else do you want to postulate billions  of unobserved universes for which there's not   a shred of evidence no evidence whatsoever um for  all these extra universes and yet the people who   believe this are eminent scientists for example  Lord Reese who was president of the royal Society   master of Trinity College Cambridge astronomer  Royal um is one of the proponents of this evidence
• 47:00 - 47:30 free hypothesis um it's amazing to me that  cosmologists can get away with this I mean if   you work in say as I do things like telepathy and  you have really good evidence for telepathy there   sort of hulls of protests there oh no no evidence  would be enough to convince us that something like   that could exist yet billions of extra univ  I es and get away with it scot-free um so
• 47:30 - 48:00 anyway they assumed that there are all these extra  universes in order to try and explain why the laws   and constants were fixed at the big bang and the  way they are and the reason they wanten lots of   universes as I asked Lord Reese himself about this  I said well why do you want all these ultimate all   this all these universes and he said well that way  we can get rid of God and I said well you mean by   postulating trillions of universes you think this  is a simpler hypothesis than God he said but I
• 48:00 - 48:30 said it seems to me like the ultimate violation of  aam's Razor you know that you shouldn't postulate   unnecessary entities um he said well I agree  that's a bit of a problem we're working on it   um so U so the point is that as the alians have  pointed out um if an infinite God could be the god   an infinite number of universes they haven't even  got rid of God they just proliferated universes
• 48:30 - 49:00 and all this follows from the unquestioned  Assumption the laws and constants must be   fixed whereas in an evolutionary Universe to me it  makes much more sense to think of them as evolving   U through natural selection unsuccessful habits  don't get repeated successful ones get repeated   the more often they're repeated the more habitual  they become so most of the phenomena in physics   that we look at in physics Labs the behavior of  hydrogen atoms for example uh they've been doing
• 49:00 - 49:30 much the same thing for 14 billion years so these  habits are extremely fixed they they behave as if   they're governed by Eternal laws but when you look  at new chemical compounds or new physical systems   like Bose Einstein condensates that probably never  existed in nature before they were created in low   temperature physics Labs then you're looking  at things that are really new where you may
• 49:30 - 50:00 well be able to see morphic resonance effects so  anyway I think the idea of fixed laws and fixed   constants leads into absurd uh absurd theoretical  speculations which are completely unnecessary the   whole question of is there a God who fine-tunes  nature or other billions of universes as an   alternative to this engineering god um this  entire ridiculous debate just Fades away it
• 50:00 - 50:30 melts away like the Morning Mist uh if you have  the idea of the evolutional habits of nature not laws what is the role of the brain in the context  of morphic field theory is it the tuning mechanism   for morphic systems and where memories are stored  and where Collective memories are stored in your   view yeah the brain is a tuning system I think um  and it helps to coordinate our perceptions through
• 50:30 - 51:00 our senses and our movements um obviously you  need a brain in order to coordinate your bodily   movements including movements of your MTH and  speech organs in order to speak um so brains are   intimately connected with perception and with  movement I don't think all our thoughts ideas   and dreams Etc are stored inside our heads uh I  don't think that our Consciousness is confined to
• 51:00 - 51:30 the inside of the head either I think our minds  stretch out like Fields far beyond our brains um   the field of a magnet stretches out far beyond a  magnet um the field the gravitational field of the   earth stretches out far beyond the Earth invisibly  the field of your mobile telephone stretches out   far beyond the mobile telephone invisibly I  mean this room I'm mean in the room you're in   are full of mobile telephone Transmissions radio  and TV Transmissions they're invisible we can't
• 51:30 - 52:00 see them but they're all there uh we can find them  if we have a device that resonates with them that   Picks Them Up by resonance so I think that our  brains are are like that resonant devices pick   up Memories by resonance and I think the fields of  our minds are extended all around us all the time   for example I'm seeing an image review Natalia on  the screen at the moment about 2 feet in front of
• 52:00 - 52:30 me um and I think my image review is located  on the screen where it seems to be whereas   the official view is that it's inside my head  the official view is the light comes from the   screen goes into my eyes inverted images changes  in cone cells impulses up the optic nerve changes   in the cerebral cortex particularly the visual  cortex and then in a way no one understands um
• 52:30 - 53:00 a three-dimensional full color image of the World  Around Me appears inside my brain which I imagine   I have the illusion that it's actually out there  but it's actually inside my head now I think the   images I'm seeing are out there I think I project  them out I think changes happen in the brain and   I'm projecting out everything I'm seeing it's  out there it's in my mind but it's not inside   my brain so I think just the simplest acted Vision  just looking at anything um tells us the mind is
• 53:00 - 53:30 extended the official view would cram all of this  into our brain and tell us it's all really inside   the head um and so I think that the fields  of our minds are morphic Fields I think when   we see things their perceptual Fields we're not  seeing what's exactly there what we're seeing is   our interpretation of it which is projected onto  whatever we're looking at um some neuroscientists
• 53:30 - 54:00 call perception a controlled hallucination  I think is quite a good phrase I think it's   a it's controlled because it has to fit with the  input of our senses um if it doesn't then it's an   uncontrolled hallucination and we're seeing things  that aren't really there we're hallucinating or   we're seeing Illusions but normally it's control  by being brought into T correspondence with what   we're actually seeing or experiencing through  the senses but it's not inside the brain um
• 54:00 - 54:30 I one of the things I do is try to test this  you see the idea is are all our thoughts and   inside our brains um is taken for granted by most  psychologists and most materialist philosophers   and most people whove been indoctrinated with the  materialist world view but it doesn't correspond
• 54:30 - 55:00 to our experience and no one's ever seen these  three-dimensional virtual reality displays   inside heads um uh but so some philosophers have  started questioning it and they there are some of   them who called radical externalists some of them  called enactivists um uh who say that yes uh the   controlled hallucinations aren't all inside our  brain they do Stand Out beyond our brain into the   world around us but the trouble with with just  saying that is it's kind of armchair philosophy
• 55:00 - 55:30 it doesn't make any difference really uh because  they don't think these extensions of our minds   actually do anything whereas I think they do  do something I feel that if I look at something   my mind is reaching out to touch it and it might  affect it just by looking at it now if I look at   another person from behind and they don't know I'm  there if my mind touches them and if I can affect
• 55:30 - 56:00 them they might feel me looking at them and turn  around and actually this is a very very well-known   phenomenon the sense of being stared at or the  technical scientific name is scop athesia scop   look looks as in microscope aesthesia feeling as  in anesthesia synesthesia um so I think that uh   people and animals can be affected by being  looked at and they respond by turning around
• 56:00 - 56:30 95% of people have had this experience looking  at others who've turned around or turning around   to find someone staring at them um now this is  a completely taboo topic within the academic   world it ought not to happen if the mind's all  in the brain therefore for many scientists it   doesn't happen it can't happen therefore it  doesn't happen and therefore all the evidence   for it from millions of people all through the  world all through human history the results
• 56:30 - 57:00 of tens of thousands of controlled experiments  which have already been done uh all of this is   of no relevance at all because it's impossible  it doesn't exist and no one should be allowed   to discuss it in a university or in scientific  journal um because it's a taboo topic this is the   current situation but actually the evidence for  it is quite strong and so I think that this is an   area where we can actually explore a philosophical  idea a metaphysical idea about the nature of mind
• 57:00 - 57:30 the extended mind the nature of vision uh  empirically um so I think for me and that's   for the Stile ideas to be tested experimentally um  you know they they have less interest than if they   if there's is just philosophical ideas I think  testing things experimentally is very important   and now coming to your question about memory  in the brain um as I already said I don't
• 57:30 - 58:00 think memories are stored inside the brain uh  you see people think it's all inside the head   the memories are all there the mind's all there  everything's inside the head this very Centric   view of Consciousness uh which is has been  standard in materialism um the whole universe   is unconscious there's no memory anywhere in  the universe the only consciousness in the   entire universe is inside human brains and maybe  the brains of other animals um as the standard
• 58:00 - 58:30 view um and so memory uh is purely a psychological  phenomenon and therefore must be inside the brain   well people have tried to find physical memory  traces inside brains for more than a 100 years   with very with no success they've just simply been  elusive over and over again and I think that's   cuz they're not there there I think the brain's a  tuning system not a memory storage system I think
• 58:30 - 59:00 it's more like a TV set than a video recorder  um I think it's tuning in to the memories across   time a TV set Tunes in by resonance across space  electromagnetic resonance across space I think   memory depends on brain tuning in through morphic  resonance across time um and uh so it's a tuning   system the memories aren't in the brain and our  perceptions are everything we see isn't in the   brain either so the brain is certainly important  essential for perception and for action and so on
• 59:00 - 59:30 uh but I think it's grossly overrated and I think  all the things are supposed to happen inside it um   are not really inside it at all the memories  aren't really inside it and the perceptions   aren't really inside it and indeed this goes  for our whole body when I feel a pain in my toe   um the official view is the pain isn't actually in  my toe it's in my brain and it's then referred to
• 59:30 - 60:00 the toe I think it's actually in the toe I think  our minds are extended throughout our bodies and   far beyond them but where is the Mind located  and is there such thing like mind at large and   what's the relationship between mind at large  and our perception or experience of our own   little Minds in your view well I think our body  is normally the center of our Consciousness I
• 60:00 - 60:30 mean our Consciousness is centered in our bodies  normally when we're awake when we're asleep then   it's a different matter um in our dreams we have  dream worlds which are lit up by light we have a   kind of Inner Light which is present in our  dreams and in visions and in h and in Psych   elic experiences you can have vivid psychedelic  experiences with your eyes shut yet things are
• 60:30 - 61:00 lit up and they're in full color um so and we're  you're in a different space in my dreams I can   move around I can talk to people I can go to  places I have a dream body that's not the same   as my physical body that's lying asleep in bed  um so that space the normal assumption is all   that space is inside the brain too it doesn't  feel like it and there's evidence it is I mean   the brain certainly has certain changes in Rhythm  when you're dreaming but that doesn't prove that
• 61:00 - 61:30 everything you're dreaming uh is is nothing about  those changes in Rhythm uh in the brain uh those   may be a state you go into when you're when you're  dreaming I mean you could leave a car engine on   and you could go for a walk in the countryside and  the car would be stationary the engine would just   be running if someone who measured the car engine  would say well this is what the engines like when
• 61:30 - 62:00 people feel they're having an experience outside  the car by wandering around and it would correlate   with going for a walk uh in the countryside but  it wouldn't correlate with what you're seeing or   experiencing it would simply correlate with the  um the fact that you're not in the car and the   car stationary I mean a lot of people think the  brain is Consciousness is nothing but the brain   because changing the brain changes Consciousness  but the philosopher Ari bergon had a very simple
• 62:00 - 62:30 answer to that which is you know if you have a  coat hanging on a nail uh in or coat hook take   away the coat Hook and the coat collapses to  the floor but the coat hook um doesn't explain   the shape of the coat or the color of the coat or  anything like that although the coat being there   intimately depends on the Cod hook so dreams may  depend on the brain but the content of the dreams
• 62:30 - 63:00 may not be related uh in any very close way to  what's happening in the brain so I think that know   our minds extend beyond our brains in ordinary  perception but also in our dreams and so where   is your mind when you're dreaming I think it's in  a dream world in a dream space which is a virtual   realm of consciousness that's not the same as  our waking State of Consciousness and I think
• 63:00 - 63:30 psychedelic experiences are also in something  a bit like the dream world but it's much more   Vivid and immediate the same kind of imaginal  world that we can and maybe when we die we enter   a world like that we can't get out of it because  we can't wake up anymore um so um so I think our   minds are normally centered in our bodies in  Waking Life in dream life they're centered in   our Dream bodies because we have a cent a point  of view in dreams we're not everywhere all the
• 63:30 - 64:00 time we have a a presence in a particular place in  in a dream body I think there's a collective mind   or memory that works through all people we all  participate in a collective unconscious as you   put a collective memory um and that's expressed  through individual humans I think the mind of the   if we take a panus view and say well the the Earth  has a mind then the mind of the Earth would be in
• 64:00 - 64:30 and around the earth and if we take the view the  sun has a mind which I think it has and I think   the sun is conscious um then the mind of the  sun is within and around the sun and the mind   of other stars is within and around those Stars  the mind of the Galaxy is within and around the   Galaxy the mind of the entire Cosmos is is within  and around the entire Cosmos so I think there is a
• 64:30 - 65:00 cosmic mind uh underlying the whole Cosmos um it's  not a new idea of course the animal Mundi the soul   of the Earth in Plato and in neoplatonism it's a  very important concept so if you want the idea of   Mind At Large the I spose the cosmic mind would be  the ultimate um mind and then if we take the idea   of the Divine mind then one one would say unless  one's a pantheist where the cosmic mind is the
• 65:00 - 65:30 mind of God and the mind of God would be Beyond  The Cosmic mind Transcendent of the cosmic mind   which would include not just our Cosmos but all  possible coses all possible um worlds um so I I   think that if we're going to have the idea mind at  large then it's a it's it's going to be very large   if we think this idea through can morphic Fields  be understood as collective memories of Nature's
• 65:30 - 66:00 mind or the Mind At Large and why do you think  nature is organized in fields what's the reason   for it well nature is made up of organizations  of different levels of size and complexity um   know if you have have an atom it's made up of  a nucleus and the electrons around it and the
• 66:00 - 66:30 nucleus is made up of nuclear particles um so and  then a molecule is made up of atoms bound together   so at each level you have say the atom like that  and then you have a molecular field around the   molecule then if it's a crystal you have a crystal  field around all the molecules that make up the   Crystal and give it its order and in in our bodies  you have fields around each molecule in the body   around ular complexes like ribosomes organel like  mitochondria and nuclei then fields of the whole
• 66:30 - 67:00 cell and Fields of tissues fields of organs fields  of organisms fields of societies of organisms like   termite Ms Fields of whole ecosystems fields of  the planet Earth of the solar system of the Galaxy   you have a whole series a nested hierarchy or  holarchy of fields one within the other each level   uh the whole is more than the sum of the parts and  at each level I think there's a morphic field with
• 67:00 - 67:30 its own memory organizing that hole so I think  there are many levels of fields and they're in a   hierarchy not in some kind of arbitary H hungry  structure where one field is dictating it over   other ones but simply by virtual inclusion you  know the Earth is undoubtedly included within   the solar system which is a higher level field  the solar system is undoubtedly included within   the Galaxy which is a higher level field and and  it's it's higher level it's more inclusive and
• 67:30 - 68:00 larger and more inclusive um so I think that's  why Fields you need different levels of morphic fields you know you you have that you say that the  mind is not really located in our brains and it's   all around right so you're saying essentially that  minds are porous I have a friend of mine and she
• 68:00 - 68:30 doesn't like football but she loves to go to games  so I asked her why are you going to football games   she said oh I want to feel all these emotions  and soak it up I feel so energized afterwards   so my question is I thought our thoughts and  emotions do you think they're all our own well there I think as you say we we share in  Collective um moods we're connected we resonate
• 68:30 - 69:00 with each other we're part of social groups um  we're social animals and all social animals have   a way of resonating with other members of the  social group I mean flocks of birds when you see   starlings flying together you can have hundreds  of thousands of Starlings flying together and they   change direction without bumping into each other  not only do they know know where their neighbors   are but they know where they're going to go  there's a kind of group mind phenomenon which
• 69:00 - 69:30 is modeled mathematically it can be modeled  as a field um that's how it's modeled um so I   think that we're termites and you know the whole  Behavior the whole behavior of a flock of of of   animals know like a flock of sheep uh they can  all be frightened at the same time and panicked   together and and and and and show Collective  responses and as humans we do too um I think
• 69:30 - 70:00 that the we have a whole range of social fields  of which we're part probably the most basic being   the family and family Fields have um patterns or  structures that hold the members of the family   together in their relationship with each other  and I think our morphic fields and our families   inherit patterns from previous generations of the  family and this is one of the things that comes   to light in systemic family constellation work  my wife Joe Pur is a practitioner of systemic
• 70:00 - 70:30 family constellations so I've often seen this  at work and it really is as if there's a memory   coming through the family field uh that affects  people in the family so individual Psychotherapy   uh often can't help somebody Who's acting out a p  p as part of the family field only becoming aware   of the family field and the inherited pattern  within it can the person be released from what
• 70:30 - 71:00 would otherwise be compulsive destructive behavior  um so I think we're always influenced by these and   then of course a football team is a social field  uh working together uh coordinated with each other   and then their supporters uh which share in the  mood of the changing mood as the game goes on Al   all sing or all excited when there's a goal and  stuff they they're sharing in these Collective
• 71:00 - 71:30 emotions is very much part of being a wider social  field all social Animals by definition have uh   social structures and organizations and which I  think are a kind of morphic field and we have lots   so we have our family fields we have the fields  of schools of businesses of particular groups of   friends teams like football and cricket teams um  and you know the fields of jazz bands fields of
• 71:30 - 72:00 orchestras fields of choirs and then they're all  fields of religion and religious rituals which   again are fields of activity and through taking  part in them we connect by morphic resonance with   other people and with those who've taken part  in similar rituals before all of these I think   are examples are are being part of something  larger than ourselves what is intuition from
• 72:00 - 72:30 the perspective of morphic resonance well there  are different kinds of intuition so you you have   to distinguish between them and there's one kind  of intuition uh which is presentiment feeling the   future I don't think that's necessarily a part  of morphic resonance at all because it's morphic   resonance come from the past and there seems to be  a way in which we can be open to the future we can
• 72:30 - 73:00 dream about events that haven't yet happened  as in precognitive dreams um animals can feel   for boings or premonitions of events that haven't  yet happened for example earthquakes and tsunamis   I done research on the way in which animals  can respond sometimes several days in advance   before an earthquake they pick up something's  going to happen no one knows how they do it
• 73:00 - 73:30 um but they can do it and often do do it before  earthquakes and tsunamis lots of different species   um so I think there's I don't morphic resonance  explains everything it doesn't explain creativity   and various aspects of Consciousness  it explains habits it mainly explains   unconscious habits um and when a crystal or  plant cell are developing I'm not saying they're
• 73:30 - 74:00 conscious because of morphic resonance they they  may be but most of our own behavior is unconscious   and uh I think most of nature the habits are  unconscious um so yeah so I think that the morphic   resonance and uh can help explain some form of  intuition particularly telepathy um telepathy   occurs between members of social groups almost all  cases of human and animal telepathy are between
• 74:00 - 74:30 closely bonded people or animals um I wrote a  whole book on animal telepathy called dogs that   know when their owners are coming home because  many dogs and cats and other animals pick up   the intention of their owner when they're on the  way home they go and wait into a door or window   um often quite a long time in advance 10 minutes  20 minutes half an hour in advance long before
• 74:30 - 75:00 they could have heard or smelled the person  coming I've done lots of experiments on it   too have people come at non-routine times from at  least 8 kilometers away um in unfamiliar Vehicles   we film the dog all the time and sure enough the  dog starts waiting when they form the intention   to come home and some dogs only do it a few  minutes before and and when it's very shortly   before it could be hearing footsteps or car wheels  on the gravel or something but in many cases it's
• 75:00 - 75:30 long before that could possibly explain it um  and so I think there's a kind of resonance in   telepathy um where if if I'm bonded with someone  we're connected through the morphic field of our   group we've interacted many times in the past  uh there's a kind of memory of our interactions   and if I focus my intention on that person or  animal uh they may feel it by a kind of resonance
• 75:30 - 76:00 um so I think dogs can feel when they're in are  coming home many people feel when someone wants   to call them uh the commonest kind of telepathy  in the modern world is telephone telepathy which   happens in connection with telephone calls emails  or text messages um where most people have had   the experience of thinking of someone who then  calls them or sends them a message uh and then   they say it's funny I just thinking about you or  lots of people just know who it is when they hear
• 76:00 - 76:30 the phone ring before they look at the caller ID  um or um answer the telephone so these forms of   telepathy are a kind of intuition I think those  are expiable uh through morphic resonance because   they're about connection Within the social  group and a resonance between a resonant   connection between different members of the social  group even when they're far away from each other
• 76:30 - 77:00 you Advocate change in the current scientific  Paradigm what do you think needs to change and   why well I what needs to change is is moving  towards a view of nature as alive organic and   interconnected as opposed to a view of nature as  Machin likee inanimate unconscious and unconnected
• 77:00 - 77:30 um except through gravity electromagnetism Etc  um so I wrote a book The Science delusion which   is called science set free in the United States  where I take the 10 dogmas of contemporary science   and show that we really need to move on Beyond  them uh in all 10 cases the the dogmas have been   proceded by science itself that's it yes and so um  what I'm arguing you see is that the U mechanistic
• 77:30 - 78:00 materialism the current Paradigm is inadequate  what we need is a view of nature as alive nature   is more like an an organism than a machine if we  if we want to guiding metaphor for the universe   for the Sun for the stars for organism then the  organism is a better met for than the machine   the idea that the laws evolve in fact they're  more like habits is part of that new U Paradigm
• 78:00 - 78:30 which I've already talked about um the idea that  Consciousness is pervasive throughout the Universe   and the universe in the end comes forth from  Consciousness um is I think a very important   part of the new paradigm now th those differences  of opinion about how that ultimate Consciousness
• 78:30 - 79:00 is related to the universe analytical idealism  as in Bernard castr is one way of thinking of it   there are other ways too I myself take a different  view but I agree with castr that Consciousness is   primary um and so then it's question of how do we  explain the material structures and the behavior   of nature um With An Origin in Consciousness an  ultimate origin or Source in Consciousness that
• 79:00 - 79:30 takes us into Realms of metaphysics and theology  which we don't have time to discuss now um that   would be the topic for a separate U discussion  do we need to bring or should we strive to bring   science closer to spirituality Would we not  lose science if we do that I wrote two books   on science and spirituality one called science and  spiritual practices and another one called ways to
• 79:30 - 80:00 go beyond and why they work and each book is about  seven different spiritual practices including   prayer meditation pilgrimage fasting um rituals  singing and chanting uh connecting with nature   um celebration and holy days that each book that  deals with a variety of spiritual practices which   have been investigated scientifically and when  scientists actually investigate the effects and
• 80:00 - 80:30 say meditation on people they have measurable  effects there's changes in blood pressure   physiology brain waves um there's increased wello  well-being less proness to depression there's all   sorts of measurable effects from spiritual  practices so I think science can help to   illuminate uh spiritual practices and already  shows that they're beneficial in general people
• 80:30 - 81:00 who have spiritual or religious practices are  happier healthier and live longer than those that   don't so I think the evidence is already pretty  clear that I think militant atheism should come   with a health warning uh in so far as it alienates  people from traditional spiritual practices and   gives them very little in turn except an elusory  sense of intellectual superiority um so I think
• 81:00 - 81:30 that the practice of science uh needs to be  liberated from these constrictive dogmas of   mechanistic materialism as I show in my book The  Science delusion um if we go beyond those dogmas   science gets much more interesting all sorts of  new research becomes possible new questions can   be asked we can find out more about nature and  more about Consciousness um by doing science in   a new more open way um but what remains part  of science so crucial to it is the empirical
• 81:30 - 82:00 approach the putting forward of hypothesis  the critical discussion and the testing of   hypothesis by experiment um that the scientific  method um I'm only infavor of but I think what   we need is a science that uses scientific method  but which is is no longer constricted in the way   it is at present by the dogmas of mechanistic  materialism then all sorts of new questions and
• 82:00 - 82:30 new experiments would become possible Robert one  last question for students and young scientist   what advice would you give them striving you  know for future science to change the Paradigm   what what would you say to them it's difficult  at the moment to change it if you're a student   I'm not a student and I find it pretty difficult  to try and change it it's controversial if you
• 82:30 - 83:00 do anything really radical you'll lose your job  um you won't get grants from official granting   agencies uh leading journals will turn down your  papers because they say they're not scientific   enough or they don't fit the existing models  and so forth um and there's virtually no one   teaching in universities moment um a more holistic  approach to science so I think the only thing at
• 83:00 - 83:30 the moment is to go ahead with studying regular  science so you need to know how do experiments   you need to know the concepts the terminology  you need to how know how to publish papers and   scientific journals um and you won't be able to  make much difference to science without knowing   about it and without knowing its conventions  but then I think U there are certain areas where   things are opening up for example in the realm of  research on psychedelics um there's been a real
• 83:30 - 84:00 opening in in terms of what's possible within  institutional science uh and in Consciousness   studies in general uh is now possible to study  things that would have been impossible to study   in the 20th century things like lucid dreaming  uh near-death experiences end of life experiences   um you know Visions uh mystical experiences and so  forth um so I think there are certain areas that
• 84:00 - 84:30 are already opening up I think in other areas they  haven't opened up yet but they will and they'll   only be able to open up if there are people  willing to do research in these areas and willing   to fund it and I don't think official government  sponsored agencies are going to fund anything   very radical anytime soon CU they're dominated by  committees made up of establishment scientists who   will preserve the existing Paradigm that's what  they've been trained to do that's what their whole
• 84:30 - 85:00 career is based on but there is the possibility  of unconventional science funding there are   now more billionaires than there have ever been  before and some of them are interests in science   um so hopefully there will be foundations that  will found uh research in these areas that all   already one or two the B foundation in Portugal B  uh funds a lot of research in Paras pychology and
• 85:00 - 85:30 in psychophysiology um so there are already a few  fairly small foundations funding this well I think   that number will increase and I think we all need  to encourage people who have sufficient money to   use that money more creatively than it's being  used at present so I hope that the scientific   Paradigm will change but anyone who goes to  University or does a PhD expecting it to change
• 85:30 - 86:00 you know in the next year or two is going to be  disappointed the whole educational system is still   mechanistically materialist throughout we're still  educating children in schools and universities um   you know in the mechanistic materialist worldview  uh so change will come but most of the ways in   which you can learn about the these broader ideas  unfortunately are not inside universities and the   official courses but fortunately readily  available through YouTube and other online
• 86:00 - 86:30 sources like the asentia foundation itself and  these are educational institutions which are not   in the traditional mold and in most of them you  won't get a bit of paper say you're qualified in   a way that will get you a better job but there's  certainly plenty of ways now to broaden your mind   and to learn about things that you wouldn't learn  about in a university yet but hopefully soon you
• 86:30 - 87:00 will be able to but not very soon probably rer  thank you very much for this interview a pleasure [Music]