Rupert Sheldrake || Materialism, Dogma, and Science Set Free || RESET

[@festivalonearth]

nice conversation makes me think of this. “I am not a mechanism, an assembly of various sections. and it is not because the mechanism is working wrongly, that I am ill. I am ill because of wounds to the soul, to the deep emotional self, and the wounds to the soul take a long, long time, only time can help and patience, and a certain difficult repentance long difficult repentance, realization of life’s mistake, and the freeing oneself from the endless repetition of the mistake which mankind at large has chosen to sanctify.” ― D.H. Lawrence

[@gracegiven5093]

Very enjoyable conversation. I think Sheldrake is tapping into "lost" or "old" knowledge, of sorts, that we lost when we took the wrong road centuries ago.

[@dawnmuir5052]

Excellent conversation! Thank you!

[@SpeakLifeMedia]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@kimwarren1044]

🤯Wow my brain feels stretched, the little grey cells in overdrive after watching this and with John Lennox last week!😅I had trouble keeping up at times and will have to watch and digest again. The push to explain or account for consciousness and how it is understood in the material world is worth taking time to ponder.

[@christophekeating21]

I see you preferred the American title of Rupert Sheldrake's book for the video title (Science set free). Thank you for having Sheldrake on, I first heard of him on the Unbelievable podcast with Susan Blackmore. He is rather an interesting character, no doubt because he holds minority views. On the dogmatism, Sir John Maddox, in an editorial to Nature magazine in 1981, called a New Science of Life (Sheldrake's first book, in which he introduced his hypothesis of morphic resonance) a "book for burning" and wrote that its author should be "condemned in exactly the language that the pope used to condemn Galileo, and for the same reason. It is heresy". So the witch hunt on him has been going on for some time. Jerry Coyne especially, who tried to ban Sheldrake's Ted talk, is a staunch partisan of the conflict hypothesis (author of Faith vs Fact: Why Science and religion are incompatible) and he's always trying to get people who are non-orthodox fired or at least marginalized. It's also really interesting to have a counterpoint to the more Reformation/Enlightenment view of the natural sciences that John Lennox seems to have (no disrespect meant to him, I really enjoy listening to him and reading his work). It would be really amazing to get the two of them together to discuss the scientific revolution.

[@JesusisGod]

I too thought that Lennox and Sheldrake need to get together and have a discussion. Also, I think Sheldrake is brilliant. We need more people like him to have discussions with intellectuals like Sam Harris, Jordan Peterson, Bret Weinstein, William Lane Craig, and others.

[@SpeakLifeMedia]

I wish I had that Maddox quote before I interviewed Sheldrake. Amazing. The comparison with Lennox is interesting. I asked Prof. Lennox whether the mechanistic assumptions in vogue during the scientific revolution were the church's fault. He said an emphatic Yes but then went in a different direction in his answer (getting into the 'length of days' type discussions). I think Sheldrake is more focused on the dangers of our mechanistic thinking, and at the same time more alarming in speaking of an alternative 'animism'. Lennox and Sheldrake together would be a brilliant conversation.

[@kirstymca]

Sounds like a mixture of the Space Trilogy and the Midwich Cuckoos :-D

[@Hedgewalkers]

Really, How so?