“What is important now is to recover our senses. We must learn to see more, to hear more, to feel more ... Our task is to cut back content so that we can see the thing at all.”
Susan Sontag

Against Interpretation

Rupert Sheldrake – The Science Delusion

n

I’ve been fairly quiet in terms of blogging for many months. At first it was for lack of energy, then is was for lack of motivation, then, most recently, it was for lack of Internet connectivity – which we have but has been very unstable and frustrating to use (never know when hitting that publish button will actually work or return an error). All three seem to be getting better now (though the connectivity is completely out of my hands).

There is backlog of stuff I want to make time to write about me (at least for my own journaling) and this delay creates an interesting opportunity. More time has passed and my view on some things has evolved. Some things have lost whatever importance or relevance they may have had at the time. Others have developed into fascinating new directions I could not have seen when they first came to me. Some cross links have formed between seemingly separate things.

So I’m starting this update process by first working to clean up my browser tab situation. There are way too many tabs open with things I wanted to relate to.

One thing which is going to lead to many others is a drama that unfolded around TED censoring two talks from its website. I first learned about it when Charles Eisenstein mentioned it. Though the drama itself was a bit interesting it didn’t really move me because I believe that TED has for quite some time departed from original, edgy content towards quasi-intellectual mainstream populism. However this drama did bring to my attention two interesting people. The first of which is Rupert Sheldrake.

In his TED talk he exposes and challenges some very basic assumptions that are taken for granted in science (which dominates most of the modern world) as what they are really are beliefs … and beliefs that have lost some of their validity. I think his observations can be divided into three groups:

  1. Those which can and have been challenged using scientific method. For example: that laws of nature and fundamental constants are fixed.
  2. Those that challenge scientific method itself. For example: nature is purposeless (this resonated quite a bit with a lot of what Robert Pirsig talks about in Lila).
  3. Those that are built upon the rubbles of existing scientific dogma. For example: memory is inside the head.

The more intellectually entrenched you are the harder it will probably be for you to progress through his ideas.

His talk resonated with me in two ways. On an intellectual level it reinforcd my feeling that intellect itself has run amok – I’ve been collecting examples of this. On a more personal level I’ve been experiencing (I’m talking about a period of ~10 years) a shift in my relationship with memory. I used to have “good memory” (I had a very busy schedule and could manage it all in my mind) and now I can barely remember what I had for breakfast (today I can note something in three places and forget to even reference my own notes).

I have been having a hard time experiencing memory … and I’ve gotten around to questioning the idea of memory itself. I don’t really trust my “memory” nor do I trust it in others. When people tell me that I told them something or they told me something I don’t accept it mater of factly (unless it has been clearly documented) … nor do I argue it … I simply shrug it off as an assumption rather then a truth. Then, along comes Rupert Sheldrake with his suggestion that memory is not at all the construct that we thought it was … and I experienced great relief … a kind of relief I experienced being with Shahar.

The TED talk is a short version of a longer and better talk. So first the long version:

and then the TED talk that was censored:

… and stay tuned there is more of Rupert Sheldrake coming.

This entry was posted in Enjoy, inside, Intake, Intellect Run Amok, outside and tagged , . You are welcome to read 8 comments and to add yours

8 Trackbacks

  • By Rupert Sheldrake and Bruce Lipton - iamronen on September 22, 2013 at 9:32 am

    […] Follow me on Twitter RSS Subscribe tat tvam asi homeyogaheartmindphotographyreading lilaabout me &#8220… and it’s always been a thing with me to feel that all men know the truth, see? … The truth itself doesn’t have a name on it. To me. Each man has to find this for himself, I think. I believe that men are here to grow themselves into the best good that they can be… I’m not interested in trying to say what it will be, I don’t know. But I believe that good will only bring good.&#8221John Coltrane Coltrane – The Story of a Sound « Rupert Sheldrake – The Science Delusion […]

  • By The War on Consciousness- Graham Hancock - iamronen on October 8, 2013 at 9:47 am

    […] is the 2nd talk that I mentioned was censured from TED a while back. It amuses me that I am rarely anymore drawn to TED talks and […]

  • […] this morning, I came across this paragraph at the end of Appendix A of Rupert Sheldrake‘s book about morphic resonance A New Science of […]

  • By The "Reality" Science Explains | iamronen on July 24, 2014 at 12:33 pm

    […] For more on this manifestation of science have a look at this talk by Rupert Sheldrake […]

  • By There goes the speed of light!? - iamronen on January 24, 2016 at 5:53 pm

    […] if this isn’t a “speed of light issue” but another hint that the constants of nature are not as constant as we want them to […]

  • By There goes the speed of light!? - iamronen on January 24, 2016 at 5:56 pm

    […] what if this isn’t a “speed of light issue” but another hint that the constants of nature are not as constant as we want them to be? […]

  • […] more on this dear-to-me subject see Robert Pirsig’s Lila and the work of Rupert Sheldrake … and this is just the opening of the […]

  • By What is Ceptr Part 2: Receptors - iamronen on August 1, 2017 at 1:34 pm

    […] world view. On the other hand, his work is theoretical (mostly because his core ideas tend to ask tough questions of science itself, causing the scientific community to keep at a safe distance from his propositions) and so it is […]

Leave a Reply

  • Inside

  • Subscribe via Email