10 Paths to New Discovery - by Rupert Sheldrake, Ph.D.
review-comments posted 4/14

Rupert Sheldrake

1) Is Nature Mechanical?
2) Is the Total Amount of Matter and Energy (in the Universe) Always the Same?
3) Are the Laws of Nature Fixed?
4) Is Matter Unconscious?
5) Is Nature Purposeless?
6) Is All Biological Inheritance Material?
7) Are Memories Stored as Material Traces?
8) Are Minds Confined to Brains?
9) Are Psychic Phenomena Illusory?
10) Is Mechanistic Medicine the Only Kind that Really Works?

These are titles for the first 10 chapters and the outline for Sheldrake's recent book.

Passing over the Questions even quickly, you can readily guess that Dr. Sheldrake
concludes all the answers to be a resounding NO.

The writer is neither creationist nor a religionist of any sort.
He sees the Science model as limited and falling short in answering important questions.
Rupert has his own way to address all of the questions, and ideas on how
 to broaden science by using free thought and modest experiments.

Scientists are humans like the rest of us. Flawed, political, desirous of acclaim, etc.
Thus, they are imperfect and subject to error.

Science is a relatively new discipline and has only begun to explore lesser and greater universes.
We live on a small planet, in a modest-sized system and in one of billions of galaxies.
We also have small brains - even scientists - and limited experience even on this planet. 

Sheldrake's New Science of Life, written 1981,
was greeted with suggestions for "book burning."
But, his basic premises regarding morphic fields and resonance persist.
 He uses them repeatedly as very plausible means to explain many of the questions listed above.

I recommend the book, but the reader needs to have the fortitude
to read through details of many scientific studies and the debate on scientific thought.

For a general view of the book and Sheldrake, the researcher and maverick,
you may wish to read the article linked below.

If not, it may be simply worth your understanding that
not all scientists follow the usual party line and believe that
the 10 Questions should be answered YES.

The title of this book in England is The Science Delusion.

Sheldrake has other less weighty books that may appeal to general readers -
 such as Dogs That Know When Their Owners are Coming Home.

His website is


From George N. in TX
Rupert Sheldrake, One of my favorites. 
Saw him in the documentary A Glorious Accident.

I agree that there is no Truth with a capital T. 
There is only as much as we can know to the current point in time, this point in evolution.

From Nicolas O-C in Scotland
Great post on Sheldrake and your readings of his work. 
Very good link to the article in The Guardian.
No doubt science is a passionate topic. Indeed I agree with Sheldrake view as can easily be guest, and not so much with the Dawkins’ (es, for there are many such characters).
There is no real conflict between science and religion for a knowledge point of view. There are many reason for such and affirmation: Different approaches, different fields of knowledge, different methods, different core believes that stand at the foundation of both of them, etc. etc. The so call conflict has more of an “old” social interest aspect to it.
Science is a particular kind of knowledge. It is not unified as if all scientific endeavour would use the same kind of method and foundations. In general, science can not even define itself form with in scientific thought and method. Nor can it found itself on scientific rigour and method. In that sense, science is not scientific. But, it does not have to be either. We need to acknowledge the marvel of science but at the same time, the limited of its field, method and quest. It is ever changing, it has an historical and social component. Its foundations and methods are “bombarded” as the atom is, by particles that come from a different “world”; history and social aspects. Science evolves and it is in frail equilibrium, which is good for that makes it move forward as not to fall apart when it reaches a contradiction, a limit or as logic like to call it, a paradox.
Maybe if we demanded or expected less from science, if we settle for the kind of knowledge it can provide within its characteristics and limits and peculiarities, things would be calmer and different fields of knowledge could interact and enriched one another with much more ease. It does not happen when we compartmentalise and divide “truth”, “reality”, principles and knowledge. (Sounds like a principle of the Ancient Wisdom, doesn't it?).  Humility is needed and less play of interest that are often foreign to the true discipline of knowledge, specially speculative investigation.
So much to think about, so much to rethink and re-define. So interesting and so revealing, at times.

From Peace A. in NYC

"We hold these truths to be self evident...."
(supplemented by a copy of The Declaration of Independence)
Internal Authority is Sat Guru... our personal connection to infinite intelligence...
not the distorted creations of the unexamined mind and compound errors of mass consciousness..

Mental Health First

"... appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions,......."
Declaration of Independence

Righteousness rather than self righteousness..
Self righteousness is a misuse of the human mind.. 
it is out of alignment with the Mind of Creation, the Divine Plan...

From Grace C. in GA, home in Brazil

I wish you can explain a little more about this

"If we look back in history, we know that Big Truth and little truths can have their consequences.
Even now, all sorts of debate and battle occur over truths - yours, mine and other people's."
Do you believe that Truth changes like everything else? I am talking about the Big Truth.
Little truths we do it all the time....That "irresponsability" by ordinary people; 
of changing small truths all the time can have a consequence in the Big Truth?
What  "As above So below" - Macrocosm and Microcosm are they different? How are they related to The Big Truth?
"There is a road, steep and thorny, beset with perils of every kind, but yet a road,
 and it leads to the very heart of the Universe:
I can tell you how to find those who will show you the secret gateway that opens inward only,
and closes fast behind the neophyte for evermore.

There is no danger that dauntless courage cannot conquer;
 there is no trial that spotless purity cannot pass through;
there is no difficulty that strong intellect cannot surmount.
For those who win onwards, there is reward past all telling –the power to bless and save humanity;
for those who fail, there are other lives in which success may come."
H.P. BLAVATSKY, 1891, Collected Writings

From Franco C. in Argentina

I went in a rush to get the book in a small bookstore after I read this,
and ja! they had the last copy!
I'll be with my nose between the pages for the next days, thanks

Return to Front Page of The Portable School