Sheldrake's Morphogenic Field - Innovation (Evolution)

by BBella , Tuesday, October 04, 2016, 15:15 (2970 days ago) @ dhw

I agree that you can't have x without y. I couldn't write a poem if there was no such thing as language. But that doesn't mean language writes the poem. “I” write the poem. Innovation can't take place without all the information necessary for it. But you agreed that the individual uses the information. That is the symbiosis AND the separation, but everything is part of the collective field.-Yes, the individual makes the choice to use information, for which the individual could not do if there were none. So in my mind, one cannot exist without the other.-> Dhw: I do not know whether the collective field can be regarded as a single conscious being (God), or as having any consciousness at all of its own. It may simply be an ever expanding field of information that can only be accessed by individual consciousnesses.
> BBELLA: Sheldrake's work/study on the collective (memory) field seems to disagree with your assessment. He has concluded, so far, even that which seems unconscious, like crystals and water, - are also able to access the collective memory field - quite quickly - according to fluidity. 
> 
> This is panpsychism: that all things have some mental aspect. Maybe they do.-There doesn't seem to be a "maybe". They do - according to his study. Whatever one might want to call it, it happens. Though I cannot or would not say it happens because "all things have some mental aspect". Is this what that would mean? It does happen! What are the implications? It is one of the very reasons, even the main reason that I looked forward to this discussion. To maybe have a bit more clarity on the implications of this particular process and maybe even expand on it a bit.->That still gives us individuals accessing the expanding field of information, but it does not make the field of information itself conscious or inventive. We have no way of knowing the extent of consciousness, from crystals (and their individual fields and their “species'” collective field) right through to the ultimate collective field of all that IS, which some people think is God.-I tentatively agree.
 
> BBELLA: So, maybe all that IS, is able to access the field, because all that IS is the field, and dwells within a vibratory symbiotic relationship with itself - metaphorically, like a body.
> 
> I like the body image. All that IS is the body, the collective field, and the parts of the body are the individual fields, each doing its own thing (from large organs right down to single cells), but each in a symbiotic relationship with the others.-Exactly.