Mar 31 2013: Note that in Bohm's model, the regularities of world are explained more as "habits" than "laws", which is a big part of Sheldrake's message in the talk. ("If you have a large number of repetitions of this process, you'll start to build up a fairly constant component to this series of projection and injection. That is, a fixed disposition would become established. The point is that, via this process, past forms would tend to be repeated or replicated in the present")
Mar 31 2013: A quote from the well-known pseudoscientist David Bohm about Sheldrake's theory (emphasis mine):
"The implicate order can be thought of as a ground beyond time, a totality, out of which each moment is projected into the explicate order, for every moment that is projected out into the explicate there would be another movement in which that moment would be injected or "introjected" back into the implicate order. If you have a large number of repetitions of this process, you'll start to build up a fairly constant component to this series of projection and injection. That is, a fixed disposition would become established. The point is that, via this process, past forms would tend to be repeated or replicated in the present, and THAT IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT SHELDRAKE CALLS A MORPHOGENETIC FIELD AND MORPHIC RESONANCE. Moreover, such a field would not be located anywhere. When it projects back into the totality (the implicate order), since no space and time are relevant there, all things of a similar nature might get connected together or resonate in totality. When the explicate order enfolds into the implicate order, which does not have any space, all places and all times are, we might say, merged, so that what happens in one place will interpenetrate what happens in another place."
Mar 30 2013: Niomi, we have been pointing out to TED, over and over again, through different channels, what they did wrong, and what they might do better. Some people have been impolite about it, but I don't believe I have been. There is a legitimate grievance here that TED have (so far) refused to address or even acknowledge.
Mar 30 2013: Sheldrake claimed in his talk (www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEo2hChKeMs&t=9m21s) that "there is already evidence" that rats learn a trick faster if other rats have learned it. Some people in this thread called this evidence into question, and some assumed that the evidence must not exist.
Sheldrake has now posted the evidence on his Tumblr: http://sciencesetfree.tumblr.com/post/45669879746/rat-learning-and-morphic-resonance
Feel free to inspect the evidence and respond in any of the following ways:
A) This proves what I knew all along! Sheldrake is a genius!
B) Bullshit! This isn't even worth looking at. There must have been methodological flaws. Don't ask me what they are - you don't expect me to take this seriously, do you?!
C) Hmmm, this is interesting. I wonder how we might interpret this evidence?
TEDCred score: +20.20 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
http://blog.ted.com/2010/06/10/does_the_world/
http://blog.ted.com/2012/03/14/exclusive-qa-from-the-ted-stage-paul-gilding-and-peter-diamandis-debate/
A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
Ayahuasca is not illegal in the UK, where Hancock gave his talk.
A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
A comment on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
"The implicate order can be thought of as a ground beyond time, a totality, out of which each moment is projected into the explicate order, for every moment that is projected out into the explicate there would be another movement in which that moment would be injected or "introjected" back into the implicate order. If you have a large number of repetitions of this process, you'll start to build up a fairly constant component to this series of projection and injection. That is, a fixed disposition would become established. The point is that, via this process, past forms would tend to be repeated or replicated in the present, and THAT IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT SHELDRAKE CALLS A MORPHOGENETIC FIELD AND MORPHIC RESONANCE. Moreover, such a field would not be located anywhere. When it projects back into the totality (the implicate order), since no space and time are relevant there, all things of a similar nature might get connected together or resonate in totality. When the explicate order enfolds into the implicate order, which does not have any space, all places and all times are, we might say, merged, so that what happens in one place will interpenetrate what happens in another place."
A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
What sort of percentages are you getting?
A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
A comment on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
Sheldrake has now posted the evidence on his Tumblr: http://sciencesetfree.tumblr.com/post/45669879746/rat-learning-and-morphic-resonance
Feel free to inspect the evidence and respond in any of the following ways:
A) This proves what I knew all along! Sheldrake is a genius!
B) Bullshit! This isn't even worth looking at. There must have been methodological flaws. Don't ask me what they are - you don't expect me to take this seriously, do you?!
C) Hmmm, this is interesting. I wonder how we might interpret this evidence?