Innovation (Introduction)

by David Turell , Saturday, May 04, 2013, 22:13 (4222 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw:It is indeed a fascinating article, and it makes me wonder why David is so opposed to panpsychist ideas, which are very similar. (Whitehead was a panexistentialist AND a panentheist!) Sheldrake's morphogenetic fields may not be quite the same as "intelligent energy", but clearly they are the source of information that passes not only between living organisms but also between particles of inanimate matter-Because I believe in a universal consciousness, which fits Sheldrakes' species consciousness studies-> 
> dhw: QUOTE: When we come to the question of the creation of new fields, we're right back on the borderline of science and philosophy where you'll never get clear agreement anyway. The materialists will say all innovation must be due to chance mutations and the nonmaterialists would say there's a creative factor underlying nature and guiding these things. Natural science -- and this includes my own hypothesis -- deals with regularity or repetition in nature, not originality or creativity, so from a scientific point of view this will always remain a wide-open question.
> 
> dhw: Again he has hit the nail on the head. Innovation is the key issue. The "creative factor" is what David identifies as God, materialists as chance, and my particular panpsychist hypothesis as "intelligent energy".-
> dhw: Good for him! "Intelligent energy" may be the X factor!-If only you would define intelligent energy and give it some coherent structure. Tell me how intelligent energy creates anything. My universal conscousness implies structure.