History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

“bio”-fields…an echo of Sheldrake

July 12th, 2015 · No Comments

I find Sheldrake’s piece (in three pieces, previous post) on the extended mind highly useful. Since I have retreated from such notions in the new age world despite partial agreement I find that Sheldrake’s take here very interesting.

We might be emboldened to re-cite the idea of ‘biofields’ introduced in Descent of Man Revisted as an attempt to grapple with the implications of the model in WHEE of global/distributed transformations. The latter are easy to document but very hard to explain.
Consider the data of the Axial Age: we see global action in synchronous parallel via independent regions, thus, in concert. There is no way to explain this except with the net equivalent of a field effect. That doesn’t mean we actually jump to that conclusion, but we are awfully tempted since it resolves at a stroke much of the mystery of this macro effect.

Let us note that darwinists still babbling away with their scientific baby rattles are confronted with this very problem, probably. The idea of random natural selection is ludicrous, not least because an effect isolated to one organism could never spread to a larger species. We again confront the idea of a field effect (but in a directed evolution). This is by no means a certain inference.
But in the macro effect of world history we can see the net equivalent of such a field in a series of devastating examples….

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment