Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘books’ Category

Rupert Sheldrake’s The Science Delusion takes on the “dogmas” of scientific materialism. It isn’t a polemic. It’s a thoroughly thought provoking book which seeks to get people thinking about the claims and beliefs of those who think that human beings are mechanical “stuff” and nothing more.

He outlines ten common beliefs which underpin the materialistic conceptions of most scientists.

1 Everything is essentially mechanical

2 All matter is unconscious

3 The total amount of matter and energy is always the same

4 The laws of nature are fixed

5 Nature is purposeless, and evolution has no goal or direction

6 All biological inheritance is material, carried in the genetic material, DNA, and in other material structures.

7 Minds are inside heads and are nothing but the activity of brains

8 Memories are stored as material traces in brains and are wiped out at death

9 Unexplained phenomena like telepathy are illusory

10 Mechanistic medicine is the only kind that really works

He then asks the reader to consider how valid or true such dogmas are, and poses questions for debate at the end of each chapter. This is most unlike most proclamations of scientists, and certainly of “skeptics” whose astounding sense of certainty about their own opinions is quite breath-taking and typically comes across as arrogant and closed minded.

Here’s a quote from The Independent  – one of many positive reviews you can find –

But alas, in large measure, science and the idea of it have been seriously corrupted. That some of its high technologies are not in the general good is all too obvious – although it isn’t always obvious which ones are and which ones aren’t. Even more to the point, and in some ways more serious, is that science all too often becomes the enemy of what it should stand for. Although it must have rules and methods – in particular, the ideas of science must be testable – it should be open-minded. It should go where the data lead. That’s what the myth says it does do – but the reality is very different. In reality, science is locked into a series of dogmas that are largely untested and to some extent untestable, which for science ought to be the great no-no. Yet they must be adhered to, or risk the charge of flakiness and loss of grant. In The Science Delusion, Rupert Sheldrake drags ten of the most powerful dogmas out of the basement and into the light of day; and does science, humanity and the world a large, a considerable favour. The most obvious and all-prevailing of the great dogmas is that the universe as a whole – including life — is mechanical. Bits of stuff interact – and that’s it. The smaller the bits, the more fundamental the explanation is deemed to be. According to Richard Dawkins, human beings are “lumbering robots”, driven by their “selfish” DNA (where “selfish” is a shameless and seriously misleading piece of anthropomorphism). Consciousness, says Boston philosopher Dan Dennett, is an illusion – just the noise that neurons make, although it is hard to see how something that is not itself conscious could suffer from illusions. On the back of this mechanical dogma all metaphysics, which in effect means all religion, is kicked into touch. Yet, asks Sheldrake innocently, where is the evidence that life and all the universe are simply mechanical? What can the evidence possibly be? Common sense and common observation cry out every turn that we and many other creatures at least, are conscious, and that we have free will. Why reject our intuitions? On what grounds? Then again, some of the greatest philosophers, including Baruch Spinoza and AN Whitehead, have argued in various ways that consciousness is not confined to our brains. We do not engender it within our own heads, but partake of what is all around. Now there are reasons from many branches of science – physics, psychology, anthropology – to take this seriously. But all inquiry that seems to offend the dogma is marginalised.

and another from The Guardian

The unlucky fact that our current form of mechanistic materialism rests on muddled, outdated notions of matter isn’t often mentioned today. It’s a mess that can be ignored for everyday scientific purposes, but for our wider thinking it is getting very destructive. We can’t approach important mind-body topics such as consciousness or the origins of life while we still treat matter in 17th-century style as if it were dead, inert stuff, incapable of producing life. And we certainly can’t go on pretending to believe that our own experience – the source of all our thought – is just an illusion, which it would have to be if that dead, alien stuff were indeed the only reality. We need a new mind-body paradigm, a map that acknowledges the many kinds of things there are in the world and the continuity of evolution. We must somehow find different, more realistic ways of understanding human beings – and indeed other animals – as the active wholes that they are, rather than pretending to see them as meaningless consignments of chemicals.

Read Full Post »

Rupert Sheldrake in his excellent “The Science Delusion“, challenges a number of basic tenets (or dogmas) of science as it is most commonly practiced and preached. The key belief he challenges is that everything in the universe is material and mechanical – the universe and everything in it is “stuff”. One of the most thought provoking chapters is about memory. He asks “Are memories stored as material traces?”

You’ll be familiar with the idea. Memories are stored in the brain. When we want to recall a memory we find it in the brain somewhere and call it up somehow so we can examine it. Analogies such as filing cabinets are used – all that has ever happened to us is filed away somewhere in the brain and we have some kind of amazing google-type search engine which goes and finds things for us inside our own brains.

In this model, whatever happens, whatever we feel, whatever we think leaves some kind of physical trace –

footprint

Maybe that trace is a network of neurons which fire off together, or maybe it is a storage area of groups of neurons. The trouble is that despite millions of pounds of research and thousands of researchers using a multitude of technologies and methods, we can’t find such traces. Nobody has managed to discover where the physical traces are which are accessed by our search engines.

Sheldrake proposes a different model. One of resonance.

pool of resonance

In this model, the brain is more like a tuner, and memories are more like the radio or tv signals which surround us all the time. Recalling something is a matter of tuning in to those signals. (No not the radio and tv signals!)

Rupert Sheldrake’s “big idea” is “morphic resonance”. He suggests that in memory we tune in to our own personal “morphic fields”. We, in a sense, tune in to our past selves, our past experiences, which remain as fields in the universe. Whatever you think about the morphic fields idea, this idea of memory being more like a tuning in to fields which are not contained within individual brains is a fascinating one.

Think about it.

Read Full Post »

The Fourfold Wisdom

Thomas Berry, in “The Great Work” writes that we can draw on what he calls “the fourfold wisdom” as we face the future together in the world. These are “the wisdom of indigenous peoples; the wisdom of women; the wisdom of the classical traditions; and the wisdom of science”.

He captures the essence of the these wisdoms as follows –

Indigenous wisdom is distinguished by its intimacy with and participation in the functioning of the natural world.

The wisdom of women is to join the knowing of the body to that of the mind, to join soul to spirit, intuition to reasoning, feeling consciousness to intellectual analysis, intimacy to detachment, subjective presence to objective distance.

The wisdom of the classical traditions is based on revelatory experiences of a spiritual realm both transcendent to and imminent in the visible world about us and in the capacity of humans to participate in that world to achieve the fullness of their own mode of being.

The wisdom of science, as this exists in the Western world at the beginning of the twenty-first century, lies in its discovery that the universe has come into being by a sequence of evolutionary transformations over an immense period of time. Through these transformation episodes the universe has passed from a lesser to a greater complexity in structure and from a lesser to a greater mode of consciousness. We might say that the universe, in the phenomenal order, is self-emergent, self-sustaining, and self-fulfilling.

This is a beautiful model. We understand and experience the world through particular lenses. We experience life through the maps of reality which we create.

This idea of the four wisdoms gives us a fascinating map. Go explore.

Read Full Post »

Have you ever thought of yourself as a celebration?

Thomas Berry, in his “The Great Work”, writes

While the universe celebrates itself in every mode of being, the human might be identified as that being in whom the universe celebrates itself and its numinous origins in a special mode of conscious self-awareness.

The theme of “The Great Work” is the amazing evolutionary story of the universe. Thomas Berry points out that we can discern three core principles, or characteristics, flowing through the evolution of the universe from its origins to the current day where human beings have populated the Earth. These themes are

differentiation, subjectivity, and communion

In other words, ever increasing complexity and diversity, the capacity to have inner experience, to respond spontaneously, and the ability to form connections and bonds.

This is a beautiful story. It’s dynamic, flowing and developing. As we follow through the story from the formation of stars like our sun, of the planets which orbit it, of the emergence of simple life forms, and onwards to the development of ever greater levels of consciousness, we see that in the human being the universe has achieved the ability to reflect on itself, to see itself, to celebrate itself.

You.

You are the universe celebrating itself.

What a lovely idea. See how it feels today to become aware of yourself as a celebration.

Read Full Post »

1Q84

1Q84, the latest novel from the Japanese author, Murakami. In fact, it’s three novels, with the whole trilogy published at the same time, parts one and two in one volume, and the third part in a separate volume. I’d say this is my choice for fiction book of the year. It’s the first novel I’ve read as an ebook and the fact the entire trilogy was on my iPhone and my iPad meant I didn’t need to carry around three large books. I’ll return to that point later.

I loved reading this novel. It has pretty much everything I look for in fiction. Good writing, great storytelling and a book which either makes me think, or somehow changes how I experience the world.

1Q84 is set in Tokyo in 1984 and tells the story of two young people, one of whom is a hired assassin who murders men who abuse women, and the other who is a maths teacher by day, and a writer in his own time. The writer ghost writes a poorly written but fascinating story told by a strange, reclusive 16 year old girl. It becomes a best seller and brings unwelcome attention to highly secretive cult.

Both characters become aware that something isn’t right about the world, the most marked feature being the presence of two moons in the sky. To mark the difference between this world and the world of 1984, they refer to it as 1Q84. It’s this kind of plot turn which is typical of Murakami and which takes you into a border zone between reality and the world of imagination.

The fact that the unusual features of 1Q84 are described in the “novel” written by the 16 year old makes you wonder whether or not all the characters are now living in this novel within the novel you are reading.

This latter theme is probably the key of the whole novel. As well as being a page-turning great read, and a magical love story, 1Q84 really stimulates your thinking about the relationship between imagination and reality, the place of fiction in our lives, and the central importance of story in the creation of the lives we experience. Take a look at this extract –

1Q84

Isn’t that such a great point about stories? They reflect the messiness, the complexity and the uncertainty of reality, and they change us. In so doing, reading fiction does literally change the reality of the worlds we co-create.

I downloaded this trilogy as a Kindle book and fired it up on both my iPad and my iPhone. I don’t know if you’ve used this technology for reading but it’s great. Both of these devices have lovely, bright, clear screens which make text very readable, and as you progress through the book the different devices keep up with you – so when I would open the book on my iPad, it would automatically offer to jump forwards to the place I’d reached when I last read it on my iPhone, and vice versa. That might sound a little clumsy but it’s a seamless and brilliant experience. It meant I could have a quick read in any few spare moments using my phone, and settle down with the iPad to enjoy the larger screen when I had some more significant reading time. I think this was partly responsible for making this such an immersive experience. I could feel I was living in Tokyo at the same time as living in Scotland.

Read Full Post »

I love to write. Why is that? Well, Nicole Krauss, writing about Roberto Bolano in the Guardian last week beautifully describes one of the main reasons….

Writing is always an expansion: a writer, given only one life, is compelled to manufacture other lives, other stories, other realms. The one life is not enough; it is necessary, for whatever reason – an overabundance of language or imagination, curiosity, desire, a distaste for finalities – to multiply the possibilities.

 

Read Full Post »

I’m a great fan of Seth Godin’s work. His latest book is “We are all Weird“. Seth’s great at picking an eye-catching and provocative phrase (remember the purple cow?). So, he makes it clear what he means by “weird” –

In this manifesto, I’m not talking about weird by birth, I’m talking about people who are making an affirmative choice to be weird. Most people who make that choice are paradoxically looking to be accepted. Not by everyone, of course, but by their tribe, by the people they admire and hope to be respected by.

The key element of being weird is this: you insist on making a choice.

We all need to belong. Seth focused on that in his book on “tribes”. We like to associate with like minded people, with people who share our values and beliefs. In short, with people who share our choices. But we also need to know that we are all unique, that we are individuals. Remember the battle cry from “Braveheart”? FREEDOM.

Well, we all need freedom. The freedom to choose for ourselves, not being the least of the freedoms we need.

In “We are all Weird”, Seth shows how over the last century or two the concept of the “mass” has come to the fore. Mass marketing, mass consumption, globalisation of brands which seek to treat everyone as the same. Politicians like that. It gives them control. Marketers like that. It’s gives them the control. Goodness, those who seek to tell us all what’s best for us in health care irrespective of our individual needs, like that. It gives them control.

But the world is changing. It’s easier than ever now to express yourself. It’s easier than ever to be your own person, to make your own choices, and to find the others in the world who share those choices, to find your tribe. And this is completely changing the game. Power is shifting away from those who want to control the “mass” and into the hands of those who celebrate their uniqueness.

We’re seeing that in Medicine with the frustration of health care professionals and patients at being corralled into protocols and guidelines based on “evidence” which is statistical analysis of group experiments extrapolated out to be applied to the “mass”.

Read this book.

I recommend it. Read it and share it with your tribe. Be part of the change in the world. Be a hero, not a zombie.

Read Full Post »

I’m a great fan of stories. In fact, I think we understand ourselves and others by using narrative, and the central way in which I work as a doctor is to hear people’s stories, and help them to change them from stories of being stuck or in chaos, to stories of flow, and flourishing and growth.

I’m also a great fan of fiction and the importance of the imagination. I vividly remember Ian McEwan writing this, about this day, ten years ago…

If the hijackers had been able to imagine themselves into the thoughts and feelings of the passengers, they would have been unable to proceed. It is hard to be cruel once you permit yourself to enter the mind of your victim. Imagining what it is like to be someone other than yourself is at the core of our humanity. It is the essence of compassion, and it is the beginning of morality.

So, this recent article in the Guardian caught my eye, “Reading fiction improves empathy, study finds”. There are a number of studies described in this article, and it’s introduced me to something called “the pyschology of fiction”, and, specifically to the work of Keith Oatley. If I wasn’t so insatiably curious I wouldn’t keep finding these amazing new worlds to explore! One of the studies described in the article compared the effects of reading Harry Potter with the effects of reading Twighlight. They used a new measure – “Twilight/Harry Potter Narrative Collective Assimilation Scale”! Don’t you love that? Look at this conclusion from that research –

“The current research suggests that books give readers more than an opportunity to tune out and submerge themselves in fantasy worlds. Books provide the opportunity for social connection and the blissful calm that comes from becoming a part of something larger than oneself for a precious, fleeting moment,” Gabriel and Young write. “My study definitely points to reading fulfilling a fundamental need – the need for social connection,”

and read this fascinating comment by Keith Oatley

“I think the reason fiction but not non-fiction has the effect of improving empathy is because fiction is primarily about selves interacting with other selves in the social world,” said Oatley. “The subject matter of fiction is constantly about why she did this, or if that’s the case what should he do now, and so on. With fiction we enter into a world in which this way of thinking predominates. We can think about it in terms of the psychological concept of expertise. If I read fiction, this kind of social thinking is what I get better at. If I read genetics or astronomy, I get more expert at genetics or astronomy. In fiction, also, we are able to understand characters’ actions from their interior point of view, by entering into their situations and minds, rather than the more exterior view of them that we usually have. And it turns out that psychologically there is a big difference between these two points of view. We usually take the exterior view of others, but that’s too limited.”

Spot on. He really nails the importance and value of fiction as a tool for building empathy. We reduce the place of the Humanities in our education system at our peril!

Read Full Post »

Alva Noë’s “Out of Our Heads” [ISBN 978-0-8090-1648-8] makes a strong case for understanding consciousness as a phenomenon, not produced by the brain (in the way that the stomach produces gastric juices, as he says), but rather….well, this is how he puts it –

Consciousness requires the joint operation of brain, body, and world. Indeed consciousness is an achievement of the whole animal in its environmental context.

He rejects completely a reductionist view that you are your brain –

The subject of experience is not a bit of your body. You are not your brain. The brain, rather, is part of what you are.

and, further,

Brains don’t have minds; people (and other animals) do.

This way of thinking is entirely consistent with what Dan Seigel teaches from a perspective of “Interpersonal neurobiology” – we can find neural correlates of mental phenomena, but we have no way of proving either causation or direct linkage between the two. This is also consistent with those who argue for both and “embodied” and, in particular, an “extended” mind (see Andy Clark’s work). I particularly liked the phrase Alva quotes in his book (attributed to his colleague Susan Hurley) –

…the skull is not a magical membrane; why not take seriously the possibility that the causal processes that matter for consciousness are themselves boundary crossing and, therefore, world involving?

I love that. We are all deeply and intimately connected as open systems with our environments – our physical, social and semantic environments. The flows of energy and life flow into us, through us, out of us. They create us in interaction with our own bodies and minds. As Alva paraphrases Merleau-Ponty –

…our body is ours – the place where we feel and the means by which we act – insofar as the current of activity that flows toward the world passes through it.

There is so much to stimulate your thinking in this book – about consciousness, about a sense of self, about habits, language, how we create the world in constant interaction with that changing world. I’ll just highlight two other parts of the book for you. Firstly what he says about science and biology –

Science takes up the detached attitude to things. But from the detached standpoint, it turns out, it is not possible even to bring the mind of another into focus. From the detached standpoint, there is only behaviour and physiology: there is no mind.

..you can’t do biology from within physics. To do biology, we need the resources to take up a nonmechanistic attitude to the organism as an environmentally embedded unity. When we do that – and now we come to my critical claim – we also secure the (at least) primitive mentality of the organisms. The problem of mind is that of the problem of life. What biology brings into focus is the living being, but where we discern life, we have everything we need to discern mind.

…once you see the organism as a unity, as more than just a process, you are, in effect, recognising its primitive agency, its possession of interests, needs, and point of view.

I feel this is crucial if we are to achieve a better understanding of these big issues of life, mind and consciousness. We have to see people as whole organisms in constant exchange with their environment. There’s something inherently inhuman about the attempts to reduce biology to physics, or the attempts to reduce human beings to physiology and behaviour.

Finally, I could pick many, many paragraphs to make this point, but let me end with this one –

We are partly constituted by a flow of activity with the world around us. We are partly constituted by the world around us. Which is just to say that, in an important sense, we are not separate from the world, we are of it, part of it. Susan Hurley said that persons are dynamic singularities. We are places where something is happening. We are wide.

 

Read Full Post »

 

Once in a while, I get shocked into upper wakefulness, I turn a corner, see the ocean, and my heart tips over with happiness – it feels so free! Then I have the idea that, as well as beholding, I can also be beheld from yonder and am not a discrete object but incorporated with the rest, with universal sapphire, purplish blue. For what is this sea, this atmosphere, doing within the eight-inch diameter of your skull? (I say nothing of the sun and the galaxy which are also there.) At the center of the beholder there must be a space for the whole, and this nothing-space is not an empty nothing-space but a nothing reserved for everything.

This quote from Saul Bellow’s Humboldt’s Gift is used as an epigraph for the last chapter of Alva Noe’s excellent “Out of Our Heads”. As he concludes –

I hope I have convinced you that there is something perverse about the very idea that we are our brains, that the world we experience is within us. We don’t need to have the world within us: we have access to the world around us; we are open to it. I take this to be the import of Bellow’s language in this chapter’s epigraph.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »