MR Evidence

From: Dace (
Date: Tue Aug 07 2001 - 20:30:13 BST

  • Next message: Dace: "Re: Teleology"

    Received: by id UAA06506 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 20:32:06 +0100
    Message-ID: <002101c11f77$62cc25c0$f188b2d1@teddace>
    From: "Dace" <>
    To: <>
    References: <3B6ECBC0.14995.5A4B18@localhost>
    Subject: MR Evidence
    Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 12:30:13 -0700
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
    X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
    Precedence: bulk

    > > From: <>
    > > > > Genes determine eye color. This is a well-established fact.
    > > > > What's *not* established is that they determine the structure and
    > > > > functions of the eye. In neo-Darwinian biology, genes play very
    > > > > much the same role as the ether in Newtonian astronomy. Rather
    > > > > than accept the existence of action-at-a-distance, astronomers
    > > > > posited an ether across which waves of gravity could propagate
    > > > > like waves on the ocean. Now the same thing has happened in
    > > > > biology. We have trouble accepting the possibility that
    > > > > influences are exerted over a distance (in this case across time
    > > > > instead of space). So we invent a germ-plasm which mechanically
    > > > > induces the formation of the body. While genes do indeed play an
    > > > > important role in the activities of the organism, the genetic
    > > > > program is as mythical as the lumineferous ether.
    > > > >
    > > > Actually, the mythical thing is the idea that there is a cold
    > > > morphic resonential wind blowing through the halls of history that
    > > > contains the shape of things to come. The argument ad ignorantium
    > > > (we haven't proven the exact linkage of genes with ocular structure
    > > > in every particular yet, so it must be due to something else someone
    > > > dreamed up) was listed as a logical fallacy by the greeks 2500 years
    > > > ago, and the passage of time has not led to any successful
    > > > re-evaluation of its status as a logical error.
    > >
    > > It's not just that the "exact linkage of genes with ocular structure"
    > > hasn't yet been worked out but that no linkage whatsoever has been
    > > worked out. Nobody has the slightest idea how genes could produce eyes
    > > or any other organic structure all the way down to protein.
    > >
    > > That's not to say that the argument for resonance-based memory is
    > > based entirely on a critique of gene-based memory.
    > >
    > Actually, since there is no evidence that one can present that
    > unequivocally corroborates MR, its proponents have been reduced
    > to impotently attacking all other alternatives, especially those for
    > which reams of corroborative evidence exists.

    Let's begin with the rats.

    In 1920 William McDougall of Harvard began training rats to learn to escape
    from a water maze by choosing the correct exit. While the brightly lit exit
    would give them an electric shock, when they picked the dimly-lit exit, they
    got out undisturbed. McDougall found that the first generation of rats had
    to endure 165 shocks before getting the message. But by the 30th
    generation, only 20 transgressions were necessary to persuade the rats of
    the error in their way. (McDougall, 1938. British Journal of Psychology

    McDougall assumed the rats were passing on acquired characteristics.
    Wishing to disprove this "Lamarckian" (and Darwinian) interpretation of the
    data, F. A. E. Crew replicated the experiment in Edinburgh. Right from the
    get-go, Crew's rats needed only 25 errors to learn their lesson, as if
    picking up where the Harvard rats had left off. (Crew, 1936. Journal of
    Genetics 33:61-101.)

    In Melbourne, W. E. Agar found the same effect. His trials went on for over
    twenty years, and even when he tested control subjects that weren't
    descended from trained rats, they still showed improvement over the
    performance of previous generations. So it couldn't have been coming from
    their parents. (Agar, 1954. Journal of Experimental Biology 31:307-321.)

    Acquired traits have often been observed to pass
    throughout a species with no known means of direct transfer from individual
    to individual. For instance, in England in the 20s a small bird known as
    the blue tit learned to open milk bottles at doorsteps. When one bird
    learned the trick, others in the area learned it by simple imitation. But
    the blue tit doesn't fly more than a few miles, and this habit spread to
    several widely disparate areas in England by 1935 and continued popping up
    in faraway places throughout the forties, including Scandinavia and Holland.
    The habit appeared independently at least 89 times in the British Isles, and
    the spread of the habit accelerated as time went on. (Fisher and Hinde,
    1949. British Birds 42:347-357.) Milk bottles practically disappeared in
    Holland during the war, and by the time they returned all the birds that had
    been opening them before the war could not have survived to see their
    return. Yet the habit rapidly returned when the bottles were re-introduced
    in 1947. According to Sheldrake's model, the more a new trait is practiced
    by the members of a given species, the more likely other individuals will
    pick it up through resonance.

    Arden Mahlberg, a psychologist, carried out a test of the ability to learn
    Morse Code. He had one group of subjects learn actual Morse Code, while
    another had to learn a newly-invented code that closely resembled it. He
    found that subjects were able to learn the actual code far more rapidly than
    the alternative, and he interpreted this as evidence that the subjects were
    resonating with the millions of people who had already learned Morse code.
    Each time he replicated the experiment, he found that the difference in
    learning time between Morse code and the new one progressively decreased.
    This might mean that the initial results were false. But the fact that the
    decrease was progressive suggests that the morphic resonance of the new code
    was becoming progressively stronger as more and more students learned it.
    (Mahlberg, 1987. Journal of Analytical Psychology 32:23-34.)

    Countless people have learned to type on the QWERTY keyboard. If morphic
    resonance is real, we should expect people to learn this layout more readily
    than random layouts. This is indeed the case. Even the alphabetical
    layout, which should be easier to learn, is often harder to learn, though in
    a few experiments it was equally easy to learn as the QWERTY layout.
    (Norman and Fisher, 1982. Human Factors 24:509-519.) (Hirsch, 1970. Journal
    of Applied Psychology 54:484-490.)

    This is just a small sampling. There's a lot more, including an experiment
    Sheldrake conducted recently demonstrating that crossword puzzles are easier
    to solve when lots of other people have already solved them. Many more
    experiments on the drawing board could easily be carried out with a little

    Ted Dace

    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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 07 2001 - 20:36:19 BST