Forums · General English Grammar & Vocabulary, Listening & Speaking · General English Vocabulary & Idiom Questions
Rupert Sheldrake’s theory of morphic resonance suggests that once a large enough number of a group or species show a particular trait or characteristic, it is naturally taken on by all members of the species, as an instinct or innate characteristic. From that
point on all members of the species are born with the trait, or at least with the
“programming” to develop it in later life. And something similar may happen
with the trans-Fall psyche. If we apply Sheldrake’s theory – which has now been
validated by a massive number of experiments – to our predicament, it suggests
that if we make a conscious effort to move towards a trans-Fall psyche, it will
become easier for other people to do the same, as the “morphic resonance” for the
psyche builds up. All around the world, people will feel more naturally impelled
to evolve as individuals, to follow the ancient paths of Buddhism, Vedanta, Yoga
and other spiritual technologies, and to live more selflessly and compassionately –
until, at a certain critical threshold, the trans-Fall psyche will become a part of our
“species blueprint,” will spread to every single member of the human race. Every
new person will naturally develop the psyche as they grow up.
--- I'm just wondering if I'm interpreting that one sentence correctly.
I understand it this way: "If we apply Sheldrake's theory - which has now been validated by a massive number of experiments - to our case, then this theory suggests that if we now will take up a conscious effort to transcend our psyche, we will be collectively bringing about the "morphic resonance" thanks to which future generations will easier achieve the same what we achieved."
or maybe it's more accurate to say that: we will be intensyfing the morphic resonance thanks to which ...
What do you think about my interpretation? Is it accurate?
So your paraphrase should not read beyond these terms.
I believe that all you can say is, "If we make a concerted, collective effort to move toward a trans-Fall psyche, if Sheldrake's theory is true, it could become easier for future generations to do the same."
"as the morphic resonance for the psyche builds up" is a little vague.
You jump from "trans-Fall psyche" to "for the psyche" to "transcend our psyche."
What exactly is supposed to be happening to our poor psyche?
As to the choice between "collectively bringing about" and "intensifying," I think the latter is more accurate. "Morphic resonance" assumes collectivism.
"Collectively" is in the wrong place. "If we collectively take up X, then we will intensify the morphic resonance for X, and make it easier for future generations to achieve X."
As an aside, I find it astounding that the Sheldrake effect, which I expect would take centuries to manifest itself (somehow getting into our heredity), should be "validated by a massive number of experiments."
I agree that "as the morphic resonance for the psyche builds up" is not clear and that's why I decided to interpret it my way.
I think by "predicament" he means our current situation and he thinks it's bad. The trans-Fall psyche it's a kind of psyche which goes beyond the human fall, in other words it's a kind of psyche which the mystics attain or spiritual teachers like Buddha etc.
However, I think I shouldn't interpret it as "future generations" because the author says "for other people" but I think he thinks about future generations.
Actually the least understandable part for me is: as the morphic resonance for the psyche builds up.
But I think it's a bit clearer now for me, although I'll yet think about it.
"As an aside, I find it astounding that the Sheldrake effect, which I expect would take centuries to manifest itself (somehow getting into our heredity), should be "validated by a massive number of experiments." I think he's talking about experiments on animals for example, I read something about it on the internet. However scientists claim that it's rather a "vague" theory.
Do you think that if I wrote "...then we will intensify the morphic resonance for X, and thanks to it (this intensification) it will be easier for future generations to achieve X." it will also be correct?
But it seems like saying that if ALL the giraffes tried very hard to reach the highest leaves, they would produce and intensify a morphic resonance about neck-stretching which would ultimately result in an appropriate change in their DNA, producing longer necks.
That is, it seems sort of anti-natural selection - which is certainly allowed!
Sort of somewhere between natural selection and intelligent design.
People are waiting to help.
Live chatRegistered users can join here