Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id HAA17255 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk); Sun, 19 Aug 2001 07:04:11 +0100 From: <joedees@bellsouth.net> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 01:06:59 -0500 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: "Newage sewage" Message-ID: <3B7F1133.21286.3DC31C@localhost> In-reply-to: <F661Fc1syN76fLNn3R20000b379@hotmail.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On 18 Aug 2001, at 14:04, Scott Chase wrote:
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
> >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> >To: "Memetics Discussion List" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
> >Subject: Re: "Newage sewage"
> >Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 13:28:52 -0400
> >
> >Hi Joe -
> >
> > >> Okay, Wade. What is it about morphic resonance that makes it an
> > >> example of "idiocy?" In what way is it "spiritual" or "new age?"
> > >> I'd like to know.
> > >>
> > >Let fly, Wade; I cede the pleasure to you.
> >
> >Well, I've just come back from a totally tantric vacation high in the
> >California coastal mountains in the Russian River Valley/Sonoma
> >County area, so, I'm not ready for dealing with the 'spiritual' or
> >'newage' idiocies, since I have no desire for any vitriolic fluids at
> >this point. I'll wait until I'm back at work for a few days....
> >
> >This is from the Skeptic's Dictionary, and can be found at
> >http://skepdic.com/morphicres.html
> >and the answer to the question at hand can be found in the last
> >paragraph of this entry.
> >
> >Sheldrake adds his doleful voice to the seemingly endless tirade of
> >noises banging about metaphysics.
> >
> >It is completely and totally part of the pseudoscience of all newage
> >beliefs, because morphic resonance is a religious add-in to nature,
> >another new god in the already deifically overburdened cosmos,
> >another incompetent witness, who, having really seen nothing, decides
> >to save time and energy with the invention of an intelligent
> >designer, because, one cannot have morphic resonance without a primal
> >morphic resonator.
> >
> >The music of the spheres joins homeopathy in Sheldrake. Like many
> >other newage non-thinkers, he's made a royal hash of any possible
> >empirical evidence, and gone for the easy fix.
> >
> >Memetically, well, beliefs are the little virii we've failed to
> >immunize for.
> >
> >- Wade
> >
> >**********
> >
> >morphic resonance
> >
> >Morphic resonance is a term coined by Rupert Sheldrake for what he
> >thinks is "the basis of memory in nature....the idea of mysterious
> >telepathy-type interconnections between organisms and of collective
> >memories within species."
> >
> >Sheldrake has been trained in 20th century scientific models--he has
> >a Ph.D. in biochemistry from Cambridge University (1967)--but he
> >prefers Goethe and 19th century vitalism. Sheldrake prefers
> >teleological to mechanistic models of reality. Rather than spend his
> >life, say, trying to develop a way to increase crop yields, he
> >prefers to study and think in terms outside of the paradigms of
> >science, i.e., inside the paradigms of the occult and the paranormal.
> >His latest book is entitled Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are
> >Coming Home: And Other Unexplained Powers of Animals. He prefers a
> >romantic vision of the past to the bleak picture of a world run by
> >technocrats who want to control Nature even if that means destroying
> >much of the environment in the process. In short, he prefers
> >metaphysics to science, though he seems to think he can do the former
> >but call it the latter.
> >
> >'Morphic resonance' (MR) is put forth as if it were an empirical
> >term, but it is no more empirical than 'engram', L. Ron Hubbard's
> >term for the source of all mental and physical illness. The term is
> >more on par with the Stoic's notion of the Logos or Plato's notion of
> >the eidos [eidos] than it is with any scientific notion of laws of
> >nature. What the rest of the scientific world terms lawfulness--the
> >tendency of things to follow patterns we call laws of
> >nature--Sheldrake calls morphic resonance. He describes it as a kind
> >of memory in things determined not by their inherent natures, but by
> >repetition. He also describes MR as something which is transmitted
> >via "morphogenic fields." This gives him a conceptual framework
> >wherein information is transmitted mysteriously and miraculously
> >through any amount of space and time without loss of energy, and
> >presumably without loss or change of content through something like
> >mutation in DNA replication. Thus, room is made for psychic as well
> >as psychical transmission of information. Thus, it is not at all
> >necessary for us to assume that the physical characteristics of
> >organisms are contained inside the genes, which may in fact be
> >analogous to transistors tuned in to the proper frequencies for
> >translating invisible information into visible form. Thus,
> >morphogenetic fields are located invisibly in and around organisms,
> >and may account for such hitherto unexplainable phenomena as the
> >regeneration of severed limbs by worms and salamanders, phantom
> >limbs, the holographic properties of memory, telepathy, and the
> >increasing ease with which new skills are learned as greater
> >quantities of a population acquire them.*
> >
> >While this metaphysical proposition does seem to make room for
> >telepathy, it does so at the expense of ignoring Occam's razor.
> >Phantom limbs, for example, can be explained without adding the
> >metaphysical baggage of morphic resonance. So can memory, which does
> >not require a holographic paradigm, by the way. And, in my view, so
> >can telepathy. The notion that new skills are learned with increasing
> >ease as greater quantities of a population acquire them, known as the
> >hundredth monkey phenomenon, is bogus.
> >
> >In short, although Sheldrake commands some respect as a scientist
> >because of his education and degree, he has clearly abandoned science
> >in favor of theology and philosophy. This is his right, of course.
> >However, his continued pose as a scientist is unwarranted. He is one
> >of a growing horde of "alternative" scientists whose resentment at
> >the aspiritual nature of modern scientific paradigms, as well as the
> >obviously harmful and seemingly indifferent applications of modern
> >science, have led them to create their own paradigms. These paradigms
> >are not new, though the terminology is. These alternative paradigms
> >allow for angels, telepathy, psychic dogs, and hope for a future
> >world where we all live in harmony and love, surrounded by blissful
> >neighbors who never heard of biological warfare, nuclear bombs, or
> >genetically engineered corn on the cob.
> >
> >SkepDic.com
> >
> >
> Oh dear. That the author of the above credits Hubbard with the term
> engram makes me a little concerned about his knowledge of the history
> behind this term. Crediting engrams to Hubbard is not unlike crediting
> morphogenetic fields to Sheldrake.
>
> My guess is that Sheldrake probably knows more of the history of the
> engram concept than the author of the above (and probably much more
> than I). As a matter of fact, Sheldrake lists Lashley's article "In
> search of the engram" AND Semon's book _The Mneme_ in the references
> section of his book _The Presence of the Past_.
>
The presence of some rather minor historical inaccuracies vis-a--vis
term etymologies does nothing to obviate or detract from a telling
philosophical and logical critique of a bizarre and bogus faithist
memeplex.
> _________________________________________________________________ Get
> your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 19 2001 - 07:16:18 BST