Compare and contrast the idea of Rupert Sheldrake in his book "Morphic resonance, subtitled the nature of formative causation" and Howard Saxon Burr's theory of L-fields.
The theories of Rupert Sheldrake (**Morphic Resonance/Formative Causation**) and Harold Saxton Burr (**L-fields/Life Fields**) both represent "biofield" hypotheses that challenge the standard reductionist view of biology. Both scientists argue that physical matter is organized by non-material templates or fields.
However, they differ significantly in their mechanism, the scope of their influence, and how they relate time and memory to biological structure.
---
### 1. Harold Saxton Burr: L-Fields (Electrodynamic Fields)
Writing in the mid-20th century, Burr was a professor at Yale who sought to bridge physics and biology through measurements.
* **The Concept:** Burr proposed that all living things are shaped and controlled by **L-fields (Life Fields)**. These are electrodynamic fields that act as a "blueprint" or "template" for the physical organism.
* **Mechanism:** Burr believed these fields were fundamentally **electromagnetic**. He spent decades measuring the voltage gradients of trees, frog eggs, and humans, finding that these electrical patterns preceded physical growth (e.g., an electrical axis in a salamander egg predicted the future alignment of its nervous system).
* **The Philosophy:** Burr was a "field theorist" who viewed the organism as a machine governed by a physical, measurable field. The L-field is a constant, regulating the distribution of atoms and molecules throughout the life of the individual.
### 2. Rupert Sheldrake: Morphic Resonance
Writing in the 1980s, Sheldrake proposed a more radical, non-electromagnetic mechanism for biological formation.
* **The Concept:** Sheldrake proposes **Morphogenetic Fields** (M-fields). Unlike Burr's fields, M-fields are not energetic in the traditional sense; they are **causative information structures** that exist outside of space and time. [Rick says- this would be equivalent to Russell’s T-fields]
* **Mechanism (Morphic Resonance):** Sheldrake argues that things are as they are because they were that way before. Through "morphic resonance," the form of a past organism influences the development of a current one. The memory of the species is stored in nature, and as more members of a species perform a behavior or grow in a specific way, the "habit" of that form becomes stronger and easier for future generations to adopt through resonance.
* **The Philosophy:** Sheldrake is an anti-reductionist. He argues that biology cannot be explained by physics or chemistry alone. M-fields provide the "instructions" for development, but they do not contain energy; they contain "in-formation."
---
### Comparative Analysis: Contrast and Convergence
| Feature | Burr’s L-Fields | Sheldrake’s Morphic Resonance |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Nature of Field** | Electromagnetic (Physical) | Non-energetic (Metaphysical/Informational) |
| **Primary Goal** | To explain spatial organization | To explain both physical form and behavioral habits |
| **Relation to Time** | Constant/Ongoing regulation | Cumulative (Past influences present) |
| **Verifiability** | Measured via voltmeters | Observed via behavioral patterns/non-local effects |
| **Scope** | Ontogeny (the individual development) | Phylogeny (the species memory) |
#### Where they converge:
1. **Top-Down Causation:** Both reject the idea that DNA is the sole "master molecule." Both suggest that the DNA is merely a set of biochemical components, while the "architect" (the field) is what dictates the final shape.
2. **Holism:** Both view the organism as a whole rather than a sum of its parts. If you damage the "field," the organism fails to develop correctly, regardless of whether the physical "building blocks" (cells/atoms) are healthy.
3. **Outsider Status:** Both theories have been met with skepticism by the mainstream scientific community. Burr’s work was criticized for over-interpreting electrical noise, and Sheldrake is often labeled "pseudoscience" due to the difficulty of testing morphic resonance within a controlled laboratory setting.
#### Where they contrast:
* **The "Memory" Problem:** Burr’s L-field explains development in the "here and now." It does not explain how a species "learns" to evolve or inherit behavior. Sheldrake’s theory specifically addresses this, positing that nature has a memory.
* **Energy vs. Information:** Burr sought a physical grounding for his L-fields (voltage, ions). Sheldrake expressly rejects the idea that these fields are made of energy, arguing that if they were, they would obey the inverse-square law and lose intensity. Sheldrake’s fields are "non-local," meaning they work identically across any distance, whereas Burr’s fields were tied to the physical proximity of the electrical source.
### Summary
If you think of the organism as a house, **Burr’s L-field is the electrical blueprint** wired into the walls, keeping the lights on and the heating systems regulated. **Sheldrake’s Morphic Resonance is the architectural style**—the reason the house looks like a Victorian mansion rather than a cabin, based on the cumulative "memory" of every Victorian mansion ever built.
Responses