A Metaphysics of Science - on Acid (or Ayahuascua)

Anne Harrington in her book "The Re-enchantment of Science" quotes Max Weber declaring after WW1, that Mechanistic Science was here to stay - we had better get used to it. European (especially German) Holism - which included Vitalism - was dead. Welcome to the Machine!

Not for Rupert Sheldrake! This book is about the re-enchantment of science, a rather beautiful and psychedelic alternative paradigm where the Universe is a living entity, like an organism, whose laws (habits) and constants evolve organically over time, where planets and molecules have purposes, matter is alive, and consciousness has powers to change the past, all immersed, shaped and resonating within a "Morphic Field" (somewhat like the Higgs Field), which contains all memory.

The book lays down the gauntlet (or 10 of them), to advocates of normal "mechanistic" science to justify 10 foundational assumptions on which classical "materialist" Science is based. For me that was the challenge that made the book so gripping. It is a clever, scholarly, imaginative, beautiful and (I believe) - ultimately flawed.

From the introduction, the book declares Science to be authoritarian, dogmatic and bankrupt - having now run out of credit on unfulfilled "promissory explanations". This is just the kind of thing that his nemesis Richard Dawkins might say about Religion - and I fear would be closer to the truth. For while religion is rocked by division, dogmatism, scepticism and scandal, "mechanistic" Science is busy making new discoveries every day.

Of course his critique of science is a way of promoting his alternative paradigm of "Morphic Resonance", but it isn't rocket science to find the obvious flaws. After each chapter there are "questions for materialists". However, I was left each time with a number of "questions for vitalists"

For instance, if we abandon mechanistic explanations (dogma 1) for the shapes of crystals (dogma 5) and organisms (dogma 6), in favour of "morphic memory", how do we explain the uniqueness of fractal forms such as snowflakes, or crystal dendrites, or tree roots, or neural networks. These unique forms are never exact replicas copied from a previous version, but rather a product of context dependant iterated processes. Doesn't it also fly in the face of Mendelian inheritance?

Likewise, if physical laws and constants evolve (dogma 4), what laws (or habits) govern the evolution (e.g. rate and direction) of these changes - don't we get ourselves into an infinite regress of "habits"? Wouldn't we also expect to see huge variation in the physics of galaxies around us, as we are looking back in time?

Then there's memory as traces in the brain (dogma 8). Morphic resonance holds instead that we tune in to ourselves in the past. Yet, this fails to explain false memories, implanted memories or alterations in narrative over time. It is also difficult to see how "morphic" memory is blocked (or even modified) by certain drugs - e.g. in treating PTSD.

Overall, it is a challenging and persuasive book, full of fringe, but interesting examples. Based on the philosophies of Bergson and Whitehead (though RS makes no mention of Process Philosophy), his motivation of a "re-enchantment of Science" is good. However, keep your critical head on at all times.

I like that it is read by the author himself - though he sometimes sounds a little depressed. Look out for some amusing imitations of other (living) authors. The strange one of A.C. Grayling made me chuckle.

17 people found this helpful

Garbage

Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? This appeared in my You Might Like list, and I knew nothing of Sheldrake: but his credentials looked good, so gave it a go. Lots of magnificent words joining together to form sentences of great import, turning into paragraphs of weight and heft and forming a book which fails to mean anything much, have any purpose, basis in fact or any merit except to confirm the guy as a crank of the first order. Embarrassing to have in my library. Avoid.

16 people found this helpful

excellent book

This is the first Rupert Sheldrake book I have ever read/listened to, and it is just as insightful and well written as I would have expected. I only heard of him because Ted banned a talk from their website,where Rupert was discussing the same themes he covers in this book....best publicity he could have hoped for. and the irony of that is beautiful. I would recommend this book to anyone who finds it hard to believe in the sanctity of the scientific method, given the wilfully biased views of scientists. this book explains where scientists have gone wrong, both in the past and now. I would also say he may well have the right answers, and the rest of the scientific community would benefit by taking a page from this book. I paid for this book and it was well worth it, I intend to listen again.

12 people found this helpful

Mind opening

As a the head of a Chemistry department this book made me confront a few uncomfortable assumptions I had made in my world view. Whether all of Sheldrake's theories will stand the test of time remain to be seen. However, the questions that he asks of both reader and the scientific community remain valid regardless.

The true spirit of science is alive here.

12 people found this helpful

An interesting perspective

I found this a very compelling audio book as it does rather magnificently shatter the perhaps rather commonly held view of the industry of science being objective and prejudice free. This was one of the first audio books i listened to and i thank Rupert Sheldrake for being so brave as to address subjects avoided by the mainstream. His theory of morphic resonance is at least very interesting and overall his commitment to an honest pursuit of knowledge seems commendable. His narration is also very listenable.

9 people found this helpful

Definitely worth an open-minded listen but DYOR

A soft-spoken polemic against militant materialism. It goes too far the other way imho. At its best when pointing out short-comings in contemporary scientific orthodoxy, a bit 'meh' when hinting at alternative narratives. Some, but by no means all, of the research Sheldrake refers to is on the thin side. So I wouldn't recommend taking any of it to heart without Doing Your On Research first. I also have favoured suspects as to which of the 'heresies' are makeweights to bring them up to a nice round 10. Not perfect, probably a four star book, but it gets an extra star for its irritant qualities. And props to Sheldrake for narrating his own book. A couple of cups of coffee could have perked his delivery up, just a tad.

8 people found this helpful

Full of ideas and alternate views

As a persona non grata in the mainstream scientific community I admire Sheldrake for what I perceive as a genuine commitment to the scientific process. Please don't get me wrong, Sheldrake truly has his scientific credentials, but he does not tow the Dawkins party line. He dares to touch on science that others do not deem respectable. In talking about telepathy he presents compelling data, taken under what seem to me to be perfectly sensible conditions and postulates as to the mechanism involved.
Whether Sheldrake is right or wrong matters much less than than the fact that he is thinking outside of the mainstream. It is vital to have such thinkers and the straight forward writing and pleasant narration makes it a joy to support them.

8 people found this helpful

Exceptional

Everything about this book is stunning to me. In depth knowledge and inferences spelt out in a clear tone - both content wise and delivery wise. J originally bought this audiobook because I am interested in the whole area of human evolution and how that happens not just physically but ALSO mentally, emotionally and `spiritually`. I instinctively fee/think we are on the cusp of major evolutionary shift. This writer has clean, pure but unaffected diction ... beautifully paced reading. The content is deep, profound and very accessible. This is in my top ten best books ever.

6 people found this helpful

Review from a molecular biologist

What made the experience of listening to The Science Delusion the most enjoyable?

Rupert is a captivating speaker to listen to on this audiobook. I was appreciative to listen directly to the author's voice, and it be one that keeps you interested!

What did you like best about this story?

This story challenges the central dogma that I and many new-age molecular biology scientists have fallen into. If truth be told, I found it a tough listen and disagreed immediately to most of what was said. As I listened over again it softened and I started to hear logic.

If you made a film of this book, what would be the tag line be?

Not always so

5 people found this helpful

Helped me see how I've been fed a line my whole life

Brilliant piece of work. A must-listen for anyone that wants to understand the roots of scientific dogma that's pumped throughout the media by bodies such as the BBC

4 people found this helpful