[Dialogue] A Heretic for Our Times

Sun Jan 22 14:58:14 EST 2006

AlterNet

A Heretic for Our Times

By Jay Walljasper, Ode
Posted on January 21, 2006, Printed on January 22, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/story/31009/

Walking to the home of maverick scientist Rupert Sheldrake in Hampstead --
London's cozy but glamorous artistic village that's been home to John Keats,
George Orwell, D.H. Lawrence and, more recently, novelist John LeCarre and
actress Emma Thompson -- I am not surprised to find that his plain brick
house looks out on Hampstead Heath. This famous (and still remarkably wild)
expanse of grasslands and groves was the spot where Keats met William
Wordsworth for long rambles, discussing the passions and ideas that would be
immortalized in their Romantic poetry. Sheldrake, one of the world's leading
spokesmen for a more holistic and democratic vision of science, might easily
be grouped with the Romantics, except that his insights about the world are
based on empirical research rather than poetic feelings.

Sheldrake's bold theories about how the universe works sparked controversy
in 1981 with the publication of A New Science of Life. Actually it wasn't
the book itself that brought Sheldrake's ideas to prominence but an
incendiary editorial by the editor of the respected British journal Nature,
Sir John Maddox, who fumed, "This infuriating tract.is the best candidate
for burning there has been for many years." That was quite a lot of
attention for a young scientist, especially one who at that time was working
as a plant physiologist in India.

What so infuriated Maddox was Sheldrake's theory of "morphic resonance" -- a
complicated framework of ideas proposing that nature relies upon its own set
of memories, which are transmitted through time and space via "morphic
fields". The theory holds that these fields, which operate much like
electrical or magnetic fields, shape our entire world. A panda bear is a
panda bear because it naturally tunes into morphic fields containing
storehouses of information that define and govern panda bears. The same with
pigeons, platinum atoms, and the oak trees on Hampstead Heath, not to
mention human beings. This theory, if widely accepted, would turn our
understanding of the universe inside out -- which is why Sheldrake has so
often felt the wrath of orthodox scientists.

For the past 20 years, he has pursued further research on morphic fields
even though no university or scientific institute would dare hire him. Much
of his empirical explorations focus on unsolved phenomenon such as how
pigeons and other animals find their way home from great distances, why
people experience feelings in amputated limbs, why some people and animals
can sense that someone is staring at them. He believes morphic resonance may
offer answers to these questions.

His experimentation has been underwritten by freethinking funders like the
late Lawrence Rockefeller and the Institute of Noetic Sciences, founded by
Apollo astronaut Edgar Mitchell. Through the years Sheldrake has supported
his family largely through lecture tours, which draw curious crowds around
the world, and a series of books exploring various aspects of what is often
called "New Science." He's written on ecological, spiritual, and
philosophical themes, as well as a manifesto on how science could be
democratized (Seven Experiments that Could Change the World) and a
bestseller on animal behavior (Dogs that Know When Their Owners are Coming
Home). His current research involves thousands of rigorously empirical tests
probing the existence of telepathy. John Maddox nonetheless has continued to
accuse him of "heresy," saying he should be "condemned in exactly the same
language that the Pope used to condemn Galileo."

'Science is the last unreformed institution'

When Sheldrake answers the door, I find a tall, surprisingly youthful man in
a golf shirt and Birkenstock sandals with socks who hardly seems a menacing
troublemaker out to destroy civilization as we know it. He welcomes me into
his home, which wonderfully fits my expectations of what a slightly bohemian
biologist's house should look like: shells, antlers, giant pinecones,
fossils and exotic-looking houseplants on display in comfy rooms also filled
with books, art, musical instruments, oriental carpets and a few patches of
peeling paint. Upstairs is his office, which overflows with scientific
journals and papers, and a spacious library room crammed with books on every
conceivable subject. A corner of the library houses a small laboratory,
which was recently commandeered by his teenage sons as a computer center.

It's a gorgeous sunny morning and Sheldrake suggests we sit in the backyard,
which looks to me like a mini-botanical garden. It turns out that I am
visiting on a rather momentous occasion. His three-year appointment to an
research post at Trinity College in Cambridge will be announced today. It
marks a homecoming of sorts to the place where he studied as an
undergraduate, earned a Ph.D. and was named a Fellow of Clare College for
seven years, where he served as Director of Studies in Biochemistry and Cell
Biology.

I ask if his appointment signals a growing tolerance of outspoken ideas in
science. Not quite, he explains. It's a unique endowment created in the
memory of Fredric Myers, a Fellow of Trinity College who was fascinated by
psychic phenomena, although today it is generally awarded to researchers out
to debunk the existence of such phenomena. "But it does mean I will be
getting a salary for the first time in 25 years and money to do my
research," he says with a sincere grin.. "But in the field of biology the
holistic approach I advocate is more remote than ever. Funding drives most
research toward biotech projects."

"Science is the last unreformed institution in the modern world today," he
adds in a matter-of-fact rather than harsh tone. "It's like the church
before the Reformation. All decisions are made by a small powerful group of
people. They're authoritarian, entrenched, well-funded and see themselves as
a priesthood."

Sheldrake's views are widely shared by many people -- indeed by so many that
it's seen as a looming problem in Britain and Europe as the public
increasingly looks upon science as a tool of corporations and big
government, not an institution that benefits average citizens. Kids seem
less inclined to pursue careers in the field and taxpayers are growing
reluctant about financing research.

"If science were more responsive to democratic input, this would look
different," he says. He points out that popular programs on television
dealing with scientific themes focus primarily on four topics that interest
people: 1) alternative medicine; 2) ecological issues; 3) animals; and 4)
parapsychology. But very little scientific funding goes toward research in
these areas. He wonders what would happen if people could participate in
choosing the kind of research they fund with their tax money?

That's the idea behind Sheldrake's recent proposal to let the public vote on
how to spend one percent of the overall science budget -- an idea greeted
with even more horror than morphic resonance in some scientific circles. But
other scientists are giving it serious consideration as a way to win back
the public's trust.

More than a symbolic gesture, this would actually add up to quite a sum of
money to initiate interesting new research that the scientific establishment
won't sanction. Sheldrake notes that independent scientists, including
Charles Darwin, have been responsible for many important breakthroughs
because they probe for answers in ways quite different than their
well-funded peers in universities, research institutes or corporations. But
looking around Britain today the only other independent scientific
researcher Sheldrake can think of is James Lovelock, who conceived the
revolutionary Gaia Hypothesis, which posits that the earth is a living
organism.

The power of public participation

Public participation is essential to Sheldrake's own research because
otherwise he couldn't afford to do it. Right now he's enlisting people
worldwide to study email telepathy ( the ability to know who's emailing
before you get a message). His website (www.sheldrake.org) offers all the
details necessary to conduct your own telepathy experiments and to report
the findings.

Eighty percent of the population reports experiences with telephone
telepathy (email telepathy's older cousin), he explains. In the controlled
experiments he's conducted, where subjects choose which of four close
friends is phoning, they're right 42 percent of the time -- significantly
higher than the 25 percent that would occur by random chance.

"I think we all have a capacity for telepathy," Sheldrake notes. "But it is
really a function of close social bonds. It doesn't happen with total
strangers. At least not in an experimental setting. And of course some
people have a better sense of telepathy than others, just the same as with
the sense of smell." He hopes the on-line experiments can identify
individuals with particularly strong telepathic skills, who can then be
studied further.

"What I am interested in are the mysteries of everyday life -- a lot of
these simple things are not being investigated," Sheldrake says staring up
at the sunny sky with that "lost-in-thought" look you typically associate
with scientists. A few moments later he pulls his attention back in my
direction, smiles apologetically and continues. "I prefer to explore things
that people know in their lives or the lives of their friends. I am
interested in science that is rooted in people's experience. Indeed, the
word empirical means experience."

By now the two of us have been talking in his garden for several hours and
Sheldrake picks up a garden hose to water several tall exotic-looking
plants. I meanwhile silently marvel at the tenacity he's shown in keeping
his research going all these years and the gentle spirit he possesses in the
face of hostility toward his work. John Maddox has said he practices "magic
instead of science" yet Sheldrake brings up Maddox with almost fondness --
perhaps because the scathing editorial in Nature turned The New Science of
Life into a bestseller and launched Sheldrake's career as an independent
scientist.

It's time for me to go, and a taxi is honking in front of the house to take
me to Paddington Station, but I must squeeze in one more question. "How do
you refresh yourself, renew your creativity and stay calm in the face of so
much criticism?" Sensing my anxiety about missing the train, he efficiently
ticks off three answers in the methodical manner you'd expect from a former
science whiz kid. "One. Playing the piano, usually Bach. Two. Meditating.
Three. Taking walks, usually out on the heath."

After a hearty handshake I jump into to the cab and, watching Hampstead
Heath disappear through the back window, decide that I sold Rupert Sheldrake
short earlier today. Comparing him to fellow Heath hikers Keats and
Wordsworth, I viewed Sheldrake as a cool and rational man of science while
they were warm and passionate poets. But I can see now that, even as a
dedicated scientist, Sheldrake possesses a poetic imagination in how he
thinks about the world and how he lives his life. 

Jay Walljasper is the executive editor of Ode <http://www.odemagazine.com>
magazine. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20060122/64600e42/attachment.htm
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 1542 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20060122/64600e42/attachment.gif