RE: MD "linear causality"

From: Lawrence de Bivort (debivort@umd5.umd.edu)
Date: Tue Jan 07 2003 - 15:37:54 GMT

  • Next message: Kevin: "RE: MD "linear causality""

    > > I don't know what a true second-level science would be (I have hopes of
    > > Rupert Sheldrake's morphogenesis, but recognize that it is still largely
    > > speculative).
    >
    > Morpho-what? :) Sounds interesting. What is it?
    >

    It is a theory that the pattern of things (such as physical shape and
    behavior) can be influenced by the pattern of things that existed before, in
    ways other than the accepted mechanisms of evolution and causality, such as
    genetics, physical influence, information transmissions, etc.

    The very existence of previous patterns -- and nothing more -- is said, by
    the Sheldrakians, to be sufficient to influence the patterns of new emergent
    systems. They posit the existence of "morphogenic fields" that provide for
    this transmission of pattersn. No evidence has ever been advanced that
    proves the existence of such fields, and the theory has largely been
    discarded. At this time, "morphogenic fields" is described, at best,
    metaphorically. A spate of experiments and phenomena were advanced by the
    Sheldrakians to prove the theory, but did not stand up as proof upon
    scrutiny.

    It was an intiguing theory, though, and Sheldrake has scientific credentials
    that won it some careful attention.

    Best regards,
    Lawry

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 07 2003 - 15:38:29 GMT