Rupert Sheldrake - Morphic Fields and Cosmic Consciousness

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 22 жов 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 101

  • @jamesrosales89
    @jamesrosales89 6 років тому +5

    This is so great - thankyou - it is the science of ‘the aura’ - which is what Life is, not the physicality. Thankyou Rupert :)

  • @nirnaya13
    @nirnaya13 10 років тому +9

    I don't have a final opinion on either science or religion, but I am very excited there is a gradual convergence of western and eastern philosophy.

    • @timc7595
      @timc7595 9 років тому +2

      Nirnaya Bhatta your comment is the most correct one here.

    • @nirnaya13
      @nirnaya13 9 років тому

      Thank you. My country Nepal is hit by a monstrous earthquake right now. It's really got me thinking about life and the reason for existence :)

    • @bza069
      @bza069 8 років тому

      +Nirnaya Bhatta what if the reason for your existence is to realize you're a divine being individualized from the source to experience the material world and follow your bliss?

    • @nirnaya13
      @nirnaya13 8 років тому +1

      "What ifs" are always alluring. It ultimately come down to experiencing what it is, does not really matter if you're a fallen-divine being or a recently graduated ape. Cheers!

    • @bza069
      @bza069 8 років тому +2

      chances are i am a divine ape. ha. cheers.

  • @mysticoversoul
    @mysticoversoul 11 років тому +2

    Excellent interview given by Sheldrake. Thank you for posting the video.

  • @heatherdawnpipke1669
    @heatherdawnpipke1669 11 років тому +1

    thankyou Techsess you came upon a diamond here thank you'S from all of us here...bless your heart sweetone

  • @markwilliams7751
    @markwilliams7751 10 років тому +2

    This is truly amazing. I thought I was the only one self-aware.....

  • @TheQeltar
    @TheQeltar 11 років тому

    You are completely right. We don't have the ability to think our way to the answers. That's why we make experiments and rigorious scientific work.
    My point is that Sheldrake very much believes that he can think his way to the answer seeing as he seemingly doesn't feel the need to show any evidence that supports his claims.

  • @cathhall7708
    @cathhall7708 9 років тому +1

    Want to marry this man!lol Could listen to him all day.

  • @LordDream
    @LordDream 12 років тому +1

    Very enjoyable interview, thanks for the upload. I do wonder though (and would like to ask Mr. Sheldrake), is the reference to "light" meant to mean "illumination" or perhaps "not heavy"? Words are merely symbols, and symbols both "conceal and reveal" so I find I must question the "intent" of what the word "light" means in actuality :-)

  • @rickroberts1067
    @rickroberts1067 3 роки тому

    David R Hawkins says we all have a physical body which is formed by an etheric (spiritual?) body which surrounds it. Could this be considered a morphic field?

  • @Atman179
    @Atman179 10 років тому +8

    he morpic resonance in me was compelling me to buy a few books by Rupert. But especially so now,
    On a serious note, I have recently just turned a corner in my truth seeker/ conciousness exploration journey. And will soon order and read, various books by Rupert Sheldrake, Terrance Mckenna, Graham Hancock, and Bruce Lipton, who I believe are front runners, and are carrying the flag for a scientific renaisonnce, which maybe not soon, but will happen. Which will reshape humanity for the good, forever. And I emplore anyone who also holds a similar view to read these works, watch more more videos a emmerce yourself in concious expansion.. Peace

    • @MattRyan135790
      @MattRyan135790 9 років тому

      They certainly are the front runners indeed. Also check out Stephen Harrod Buhner. He is the front runner in the field of plant intelligence and the Gaia Hypothesis

  • @TheEighthHouseSol
    @TheEighthHouseSol 11 років тому

    Also: No one is arbitrarily imposing any intelligence on inanimate objects, what we are doing is asking questions that scientism and it's proponents are either afraid or too arrogant and self-righteous to ask. There is nothing 'IMPOSED" here. There are only observations and what is learned, and guess what, personal and honest experience counts in these questions, this is why people like us have an upper hand as opposed to mainstream science. We actually care about experiential evidence.

  • @isupportyou9929
    @isupportyou9929 5 років тому

    I always think of fire which has live as animals that need to inhale and exhale some kind of air, and need food supply such as fuel or wood .

  • @vatofichor
    @vatofichor 3 місяці тому

    you can talk to the sun, it will talk to you through understandings or visions. try it before knocking it, be serious and reach out to him and not just a ball of fire. then be receptive and wait for the synchronicities. ask him set for a revelation or sign, show gratitude, and ask him to bridge the gap between your minds

  • @jellyphish2112
    @jellyphish2112 11 років тому

    Do keep in mind that Dr. Sheldrake himself said how very surprised and pleased he was at the backlash against TED for censoring his talk...there is much discussion, yet the profit makers have co-opted Universities to serve their interest (namely micro-bio), still there is yet hope.

  • @zomaa777
    @zomaa777 7 років тому +1

    Coherence is a form of morphic resonance?

  • @o0xemas0o
    @o0xemas0o 12 років тому

    3:41 He describes some outdated astrophysics. The nature of galactic nuclei has recently become vastly expanded, delineating both their structure and "intent," insofar as they mix and mash energy and expel radiation outward.

  • @MsJdeluxe
    @MsJdeluxe 11 років тому

    Find this freeing and hopeful yet also as alliant alludes: if Mr. Sheldrake’s concepts are so disturbing to mainstream science, it makes one feel afraid to express agreeable thoughts! I do share these on FB.

  • @jamesrediess7404
    @jamesrediess7404 11 років тому

    gentleman every scientific discovery no matter how mundane starts out with a certain amount of theoretical brainstorming if you will, quantum science is no different. This is neccesary because we as humans do not have the intellectual omnipotence to just think our way straight to the answers to the big questions multiversal science especially blame the limits of out consiousnous

  • @carpo719
    @carpo719 11 років тому +1

    I can see that. And I understand the need for scientific processes. However, many of the needed studies are unfunded and not too well known. Furthermore, science can only prove what can be measured and repeated. In a universe of observer effect, it makes it hard to find the answers to the ethereal. So the 'mysteries' of life will continue to be considered 'pseudoscience' until we can prove these fields exist. Which we are getting closer to doing. But these ideas are ancient, not new theories.

  • @alliant
    @alliant 11 років тому

    he has not said these theories have been unequivocally proven by scientific studies - he claims there is some support and there should be further research conducted.

  • @TheQeltar
    @TheQeltar 11 років тому

    No, quantum physics does most certainly not depend almost entirely on theoretics. Many of its conclusions have been tested and confirmed. It is true that things like multiverse theory is entirely guesswork, but then the multiverse theory isn't a part of accepted quantum theory.

  • @honeys.kapoor2838
    @honeys.kapoor2838 4 роки тому

    Thinking is a state of consciousness.
    No Law applies to thinking.
    That is why experinece format understands that I am experiencing myself

  • @chiefmangosuthubuthelezi8839
    @chiefmangosuthubuthelezi8839 8 років тому

    Play the Rupert Sheldrake drinking game with up to five people. Pick from the words 'Field' 'Galaxy' 'Resonance' 'Morphic' and 'Relationship'
    Good luck.

  • @agctony123
    @agctony123 9 років тому +5

    @Dossano 777 We dont have to follow a religion to take action spiritually...

    • @extraterrestrial16
      @extraterrestrial16 9 років тому +2

      +ToNy Cazorla yes thats true.. because religion could be seen as a sort of view point or particular path of spirituality, but not necessarily the spiritual path itself.

    • @AS-zn3zd
      @AS-zn3zd 5 років тому

      @@extraterrestrial16 The major purpose of religious its collecting as much as possible of vessels (humans) to stream their energy toward one point- god. It has nothing to do with spirituality. "spirituality" is a sauce under which religious is served to people. Other wise there will be not performed so much killing for name of god..or any killing.

    • @samrosendahl392
      @samrosendahl392 4 роки тому

      extraterrestrial16 the spiritual is merely the ends by which the means of the “base” of religion, achieves

    • @samrosendahl392
      @samrosendahl392 4 роки тому

      extraterrestrial16 that’s like saying you don’t need paint to paint because you have the canvas. Or you can drive to where you need to go without a car. It’s nonsense. One is the means to the implied ends

  • @GriffithBotH
    @GriffithBotH 11 років тому

    I Can't believe Sheldrake is 70. He looks like he's in early 50's!

  • @lookatmepleasesir
    @lookatmepleasesir 11 років тому

    what things do we know are untrue which he posits as fact?

  • @-Siculus-Hort-
    @-Siculus-Hort- 10 років тому

    since we are part of this reality, does that not also make reality conscious a self aware. im writing this off the bat, before watching the video. if they say this in the video i apologize for the redundancy.

  • @o0xemas0o
    @o0xemas0o 12 років тому

    All wave-like systems (all reality) have inherently integrative properties. He's right, but he needs to prove it experimentally to get taken seriously (which is justified, or we'd have publiations of 2012 apocalypse theories in nature)

  • @kundalinipsych
    @kundalinipsych 11 років тому

    2:40 Ah, the Driesch sea urchins!
    Don't be despondent, there's plenty of science dovetailing with Sheldrake. You have to dig for it, that's all, because of what I call the "grey veil" that has been drawn over it.
    If you look up Hans Driesch -- or Jagadish Chandra Bose, or Robert Becker -- you'll like it. Gregory Bateson and Milton Erickson, and you're halfway to looking at Gopi Krishna. Ee have the internet, info is free. Use hard-won freedoms and technologies to lift the veil!

  • @dawidczerniak5177
    @dawidczerniak5177 6 років тому +1

    I think we used to call it God in the past

  • @c23am
    @c23am 10 років тому +1

    I'd still like to challenge Sheldrake with respect to the egoic and fearful foundations of Christian/Anglican worship in light of his personal interest in it. Also the dogmatic mentality of monotheistic religion that he's had enough trouble with when it comes to advocates of materialist science.

  • @returnroquentin
    @returnroquentin 11 років тому

    How does he not follow scientific method?

  • @777theodora
    @777theodora 9 років тому +1

    QUANTUM SCIENCE AND CHRIST TEACHINGS ARE TOGETHER !

  • @alliant
    @alliant 11 років тому

    if you're the same cat who asked for peer reviewed literature and refused to look at the multiple posts I responded with, then I'm not going to waste my time with someone who has absolutely, irreversibly made up their mind about a very bright man's entire intellectual career.

  • @777theodora
    @777theodora 9 років тому +3

    Mr Sheldrake, we need to to sth about chemtrails and harmful frequencies weapons, i created a small group using ' morphic field' to start healing the Atmosphere, bees , trees, waters, soils , people; and Nature,and im Christian, .
    we are incarnated and Love must be incarnated , the connection with God, and our Soul is the main thing now that Earth is in very hard times because of the radiations ans chemtrails haarp malevelent invasion of poisons and wrong frequencie killing wales, bees, birds, animals at at a exponential speed.. ( military weapons,, or occult malevelent purpose , they dont care about killing the planet )
    we are the only ones , we, who are incarnated here , who can become aware and conscious and not only know waht is going on, but take action
    Phsycal action , Spirtitual action together, not separated.
    i dont believe in' 'political' ' actions, , revolutions taht will take years and years, while the planet is already in ELE; Emergency state ..
    and sensitive souls feel this and ear the Call..
    WE HAVE TO HELP and WE can help to heal
    God asks us to help !
    i m sure we can reverse the effects and cancel the radiations and chemtrails using this Knowledge you develop here, and our heart together. making intentions , orgone and prayers, with of course , our Faith and the Father will listen .we are not doing this for ' getting power and become gods' ,( New Age )
    but to do His Will and be humble in gratitude to our Creator.
    i dont think " energy' alone is enough, we must had our Love and Faith in God when we use ' energy' and even 'etheric tools ' like Orgone
    Thank you.

    • @ms7HD
      @ms7HD 5 років тому

      Can you please explain how you create morphic field ? I want to learn it how it's done

  • @bris1tol
    @bris1tol 10 років тому +1

    Consciousness, perception and thinking. A theory of mind according to platonic physics.
    You will not find an explanation as understandable as this in the current Stanford Leibniz site,
    which is incomplete as it makes no mention of Mind.
    1. Plato's Mind (the One, the Self) is the cause agent, the singular cybernetic control point, of all perception,
    thinking and doing in the universe, where control is top down from Mind.
    2. Plato's Mind is timeless and spaceless, and being the only Reality, time and space
    are not ultimately real, but are artificial constructions.
    3. Since Mind is mental, not physical, all control and causation is mental, not physical,
    and top down, since Mind is the singular (cybernetic) control point at the top.
    4. Thus Mind plays the brain like a violin, not the reverse.
    5. Man's mind (small m) is a passive mental subset, or monad, of Mind and under its control.
    6. This monad (our mind) is the mental correspondent of the brain and controls it. Our mind
    plays our brain like a violin.
    7. Thinking is the intentional action of Mind (and thus mind) on mental entities such as ideas,
    manipulating and transforming them intentionally (through will).
    8. Qualia are simply sensory experiences, the conversion by Mind of sensory nerve signals into
    mental sensory experiences in a fashion similar to the conversion of physical sensory nerve signals
    into mental images.
    9.. AQs Dennett has explained, In materialist thinking, there is no end to homunculi viewing the universe
    through a chain of homunculi. Leibniz terminates this infinite regress by making the last viewer the Self ,
    which is at a higher level and suitably equipped.
    10. Perception occurs as Mind converts physical sensory signals in the brain into mental experiences in one's mind.
    11. These experiences can be made conscious (are made aware) by reperceiving or thinking them.
    This is called apperception by Leibniz. Thus consciousness is apperception.
    12. The universe, according to Leibniz, is viewed directly by the One (the Self, the ONLY true perceiver),
    which views these scenes discretely and in sequence (analogous to snapshots) at discrete points as a whole
    indirectly through the totality of individual monads, and from their own perspectives.
    13. This totality of sets of individual perceptions is then distributed in the proper order and perspective to
    each of the monads in the universe.
    14. These individual sets are called "perceptions", and must be distributied in this indirect fashion
    by Mind because each monad, in order to remain an individual, has no "windows", to use Leibniz's term.
    15. The perceptions are made up of what the monad would see of its nearby neighbors
    if it were allowed to do so. This is purely mental, but allows us to speak in terms of
    spacial distances and directions, through these snapshots, between physical bodies,
    which Mind, being spaceless, cannot actually directly.
    16. Mind is also timeless, so that time is physically "created" as an artifact through
    the actual motions of physical bodies in physical spacetime.
    15. Intelligence is the nonphysical ability to freely make autonomous choices. It is a faculty of
    nonphysical Mind, the Nothing out of which the physical universe exploded in the Big Bang.
    17. Another name for this nonphysical intelligence is "life." Leibniz maintained that the entire
    universe is alive.
    18. Each monad is perpetual, created at the beginning of the universe and only annihilated by Mind.
    19. Since monads can contain other monads, they can. as plants do through seeds,
    and humans do through sexual reproducxtion, produce subsequent generations.
    20. A robot or computer has no Mind or Self which has the wide bandwidth, intelligence
    and intentionality to actually perceive , think, or do things, such as Mind does.
    So, being without Mind, computers can have no actual intelligence or life.
    21. The current theory of mind is materialist. In contrast to the above, it uses the usual decapitated,
    mindless, or where mind is at best an abstract entity, not a living presence as in the above.
    The materialist model of perception, thinking and doing, being Mindless, is dead.
    DSG
    Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (retired, 2000).
    See my Leibniz site: rclough@verizon.academia.edu/RogerClough
    For personal messages use rclough@verizon.net

  • @ecobian42
    @ecobian42 11 років тому

    People questioning and rumbling towards sheldrake get outta here with these comments

  • @alliant
    @alliant 11 років тому +2

    although it's painfully obvious that you've made up your mind on the Sheldrake crusade, here's where you can find scientific papers he has published. Please try to communicate with us. I promise you Sheldrake is trying to help science go further into the universe, not stall it or go backwards. Try to see that obvious truth.

  • @alliant
    @alliant 11 років тому

    and "full of hot air with no evidence nor reason" is certainly not an ad hominem, right?

  • @timcommerford9947
    @timcommerford9947 11 років тому +1

    "Morphic field" = genetics and epigenetics

    • @samrosendahl392
      @samrosendahl392 4 роки тому

      Fleshfor Frankenstein doesn’t the term get its origination from the developmental biology describing the early stage of the fetus?

  • @ChefClary60
    @ChefClary60 11 років тому

    @viper

  • @angelamilner3651
    @angelamilner3651 10 років тому

    eternal youth the movie
    Eternal Youth the movie Preview

  • @JimMcCray
    @JimMcCray 11 років тому

    I wish I could read lips.

  • @EltonJThe
    @EltonJThe 11 років тому

    Why is a realm belonging to religion and philosophy. :)

  • @alliant
    @alliant 12 років тому

    Doesn't it disturb you to think this way of thinking is extremely rare, and actively attacked throughout developed societies? I can't help but feel a little hopeless and surrounded by Inquisition-like ignorance. I'm afraid to contribute my own thoughts to the world.

  • @heatherdawnpipke1669
    @heatherdawnpipke1669 11 років тому

    thankyou Techsess ive decided you subscribed so you can post to me...ok thankyou dear

  • @TheMojomo
    @TheMojomo 10 років тому

    Hinduism does describe an end of destruction. But don't be so sure that destruction isn't the point, the purpose. Self-annihilation, or the return to the Void, is the ultimate will of the universe.

  • @myleslawless6594
    @myleslawless6594 7 років тому

    As usual, Sheldrake offers no proof to support his ideas. How is a morphic fiel detected, what are its measurable properties, etc.

  • @masdenis9432
    @masdenis9432 10 років тому

    Albtraum Bewerbung!

  • @alliant
    @alliant 11 років тому

    actually he has followed the scientific method in his studies and his major proposition is that these theories BE STUDIED scientifically. get out of here fool, your ideology screen is on too tight.

  • @ewenfraser883
    @ewenfraser883 10 років тому +1

    How did an intelligent man become so deluded?

  • @sqlblindman
    @sqlblindman 9 років тому +3

    Calling this pseudoscience would be an insult to astrology.

    • @huberthubert860
      @huberthubert860 9 років тому +1

      +sqlblindman If you try to bring people offf their convictions, they behave like addicts.

    • @bodach7524
      @bodach7524 9 років тому

      +sqlblindman
      Just call it crap because that is what it is !

    • @huberthubert860
      @huberthubert860 9 років тому +2

      So, you know about crap!

    • @TheNobleLoyalist
      @TheNobleLoyalist 8 років тому

      What are you saying is "crap"?

  • @bodach7524
    @bodach7524 9 років тому

    " The sun has a kind of intelligence" What nonsense !

    • @extraterrestrial16
      @extraterrestrial16 9 років тому +7

      +Reductionist why not.. why couldnt the sun have an intelligence of its own.
      just because it doesnt match our contemporary conceptual understanding of how intelligence within our particular context should function..

    • @bodach7524
      @bodach7524 8 років тому

      +extraterrestrial16
      Why couldn't a stone have intelligence of a kind ? Anything you care to think of ? The real question is why you lack the intelligence to understand that Sheldrake is talking crap.Nobody deserves to be that dim.

    • @extraterrestrial16
      @extraterrestrial16 8 років тому +3

      Yes exactly a stone could very well have an intelligence..
      Just not our sort / form of it,
      But a kinda of primordial form of being which exist within the contiuum..
      Just because you cant talk to it..
      And u know wat they say man,
      Under the crap is the magic mushroom.. should take a bit sometime,. U might just a limitation or 2 in your own belief system..
      Because it seems that your problem is pessimistic denial.
      Otherwise your just ignoring the extended logic if the evidence.

    • @dawidczerniak5177
      @dawidczerniak5177 6 років тому +1

      It Is nonsense because you’ve said it? That’s a nonsense