Philosophical musings on Quanta & Qualia; Materialism & Spiritualism; Science & Religion; Pragmatism & Idealism, etc.
Post 43.07/01/2018
Morphogenesis & Enformation
Biological Enformation or BS?
. . . . But, as he said in the quote above, “. . . they do not explain the organization itself.” How did the Big Bang get arranged into the abstract coded pattern that unfolds into an organic cosmos? Was there a self-perpetuating Multiverse parent that is also self-existent? My hypothesis is that only an immaterial Mind-field can be both orderly and eternal. That ultimate eternal field is what I call G*D. But Sheldrake is a Christian, so he would spell it “God”.
Sheldrake lists some of the properties of fields in general, and more specifically of his own Morphic Fields : A> Self-organizing wholes; B> Spatio-temporal patterns of vibrations; C> Attractors similar to gravitational field; D> Morphic units or holons; E> Structures of probability; F> Cumulative memory or habits. Most of these attributes are found in physical fields, such as electromagnetism, yet mainstream Science hasn't reported any signs of biological fields. But then, it took years of research into the mysteries of electricity & magnetism before Maxwell's equations implied that they were different aspects of a single continuous (non-particular) mathematical phenom-enon, that he described metaphorically as a “field”.
Since then, physicists have labeled five unique force fields, which they assume are subordinate to some undiscovered universal energy field that governs physics, chemistry & biology from quantum to cosmic levels of reality. Consequently, the existence of a specific life-enforming biological field (élan vital) seems possible, even likely. But we still lack any objective tools to measure its effects in numerical units. So the fringey para-psychological applications of morphic theory are almost entirely based on anecdotes of subjective feelings and impressions. “The Force” in Star Wars is a compelling myth, but not a useful scientific concept.
Watch the time-lapse videos of plant and cell growth above. They seem to be enforming themselves, not by being poured into a mould, but by building-up from within. Genes make proteins, but what tells those products where to go in the growing structure? How does a protein know what to do, and where to go? They seem to “learn” from context – communi-cating with other proteins? -- what their proper role in the whole should be. Anyway, however it works in detail, the notion of a mediating field that allows for mutual exchange of information (data + energy) within a holon (in this case, a young bean sprout) under the influence of the biological system, seem reasonable. All we need now is a Maxwell to produce the equations for measuring and envisioning the process of biological enformation.
Although I have some reservations about “psychic” fields, I find the notion of biological fields to be compatible with the general theory of Enformationism. Even psychic fields are hypothetically plausible, but the evidence so far is ambiguous. Most demonstrations of psychic powers are pathetic in their ambiguity and dependence on sympathetic interpretation of vague data. I can see how you might imagine a spoon-bender like Uri Geller, tapping into a non-biological morphogenetic field to change the shape of metal objects. But, since stage magicians can get the same effects by trickery, spoon-bending doesn't seem to prove anything, except that people are easily deceived. Sheldrake’s general notion of enforming fields fit my own theory. But I’ll reserve judgment on the spooky stuff.
End of Post 43
Note 4 : While I appreciate his ability to think outside-the-box, I'm wary of some of the far-out applications of his theory, such as the “sense of being stared at”, and mental telepathy. Such subjective perceptions are difficult to prove or disprove objectively, but easy to fake for status or money. In any field, all things are interconnected, and share enformation, but most of that information is in mathematical form that is hard to translate into human language. If Sheldrake would stick to biology, and avoid the psychic sidetracks, I sus-pect that his theory would be taken more seriously by scientists. But he seems sincere in his mind-power extrapolations from field theory. If I had any experience of such direct mind-to-mind communi-cation, I might agree with him.
Note 5 : Sheldrake may imagine the Morphic Field as a physical thing. But I view all fields as metaphysical information structures (mathematical ratios). Each physical, chemical, and biological field is created by the holons that make up the whole, which in turn influences the development of new things within the system. Only the universal field is eternal and omni-potential. I think the mathe-matical structure of these form fields could be con-densed into a formula on a T-shirt.
Note 3 : These biological entities not only appear to be alive, but they seem to be striving toward some goal. Is it pushed or pulled? Is it guided by genes one protein at a time, or by an invisible environmental system of mutual enformation? We can’t see anything pushing or pulling on the sprouts, so what is deter-mining their evolving shape? Are the contextual signals simply chemical, or are they physical, in the sense of energies or forces? Or are they enformational, in the sense of all of the above? Sheldrake implies that the whole system works together as a field to share information in the service of some holistic goal. But who sets the teleological destination? Is it decided democratically within the system, or was the final goal preset by the programmer of the system?
NEXT
BACK
Forum
