Alfred Rupert Sheldrake was born on June 28, 1942. He is an English writer and scientist who studies paranormal topics. He created a theory called morphic resonance, which suggests that nature has a kind of memory. This idea is not accepted by most scientists and is often called pseudoscience. Sheldrake has worked as a biochemist at Cambridge University, a scholar at Harvard University, a researcher at the Royal Society, and a plant scientist in India.

Sheldrake has also written about paranormal subjects, such as knowing the future before it happens, scientific studies about telepathy, and the idea that people can feel when they are being watched. Some people describe him as a New Age writer.

Sheldrake’s theory of morphic resonance claims that "memory is built into nature" and that "natural systems… learn from similar things that came before them." He believes this theory explains how organisms might connect with each other in ways similar to telepathy. He uses this idea to explain certain topics in biology, like how living things develop, pass traits to their offspring, and remember things.

Scientists who disagree with Sheldrake say there is no strong evidence to support morphic resonance. They also note that the theory does not match findings from genetics, the study of how living things grow, brain science, and chemistry. Some critics worry that public interest in Sheldrake’s books and speeches may confuse people about how real science works.

Early life and education

Rupert Sheldrake was born on June 28, 1942, in Newark-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire, to Reginald Sheldrake and Doris (née Tebbutt). His father was a pharmacist who studied at the University of Nottingham and owned a chemist shop near where Rupert’s grandparents had a wallpaper store. Sheldrake says his father, who studied nature and used microscopes in his free time, helped him develop an interest in animals and plants.

Although Sheldrake’s parents were Methodists, they sent him to Worksop College, an Anglican boarding school. He once said:

"I went through the standard scientific atheist phase when I was about 14… I believed that science and atheism were connected. I was the only boy at my Anglican boarding school who refused to be confirmed."

Before starting college, Sheldrake worked for nine months at the Parke-Davis pharmacology research lab in London. He said this experience was important because it involved harming lab animals, which made him very uncomfortable. At Clare College, Cambridge, he studied biology and biochemistry. In 1964, he received a special opportunity to study the philosophy and history of science at Harvard University. After one year at Harvard, he returned to Cambridge, where he earned a PhD in biochemistry in 1968 for his research on plant growth and plant hormones.

Career

After earning his PhD, Sheldrake became a fellow at Clare College. He worked in biochemistry and cell biology with support from the Royal Society Rosenheim Research Fellowship. He studied auxins, a type of plant hormone that helps control how plant cells develop. Sheldrake and Philip Rubery created a model called the chemiosmotic model to explain how auxins move in plants.

Sheldrake said he stopped this research after nine years. He believed the system was circular and did not explain how plant cells first begin to develop. He concluded that biochemistry could not answer why living things have their basic shapes.

From 1968 to 1969, Sheldrake worked at the University of Malaya. He was interested in Indian philosophy, Hinduism, and transcendental meditation. He left his job at Clare College and moved to Hyderabad, India, to study the physiology of tropical crops. From 1974 to 1978, he worked as a principal plant physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT). There, he wrote about crop physiology and co-authored a book about the anatomy of the pigeonpea.

Sheldrake left ICRISAT to write A New Science of Life. During this time, he spent 1.5 years at the Saccidananda Ashram of Bede Griffiths, a monk who worked with Hinduism. The book, published in 1981, introduced his idea of morphic resonance. He said the idea came to him suddenly and was exciting. Some colleagues at Clare College were open to the idea, but scientists in labs were less accepting.

After writing A New Science of Life, Sheldrake continued working at ICRISAT as a part-time consultant until 1985. He published his second book, The Presence of the Past, in 1988. In the 1990s and 2000s, he wrote more books, including joint works with Ralph Abraham, a mathematician, and Terence McKenna, an ethnobotanist and philosopher. He also wrote two books with Matthew Fox, a priest and theologian.

In 1993, Sheldrake was one of six people featured in a documentary called A Glorious Accident by filmmaker Wim Kayzer. The film explored questions about consciousness and included a discussion among the participants. It was shown on Dutch public television in 1993 and on a U.S. PBS station in 1994. A book based on the documentary was published in Dutch and English.

Since 2004, Sheldrake has been a visiting professor at the Graduate Institute in Bethany, Connecticut. He also led the Holistic Learning and Thinking Program until 2012. From 2005 to 2010, he directed the Perrott–Warrick Project for psychical research, funded by Trinity College, Cambridge. As of 2014, he was a fellow of the Institute of Noetic Sciences in California and Schumacher College in England. He also became a fellow of the Temenos Academy in London.

In 2017, Sheldrake published a book titled Arguing Science: A Dialogue on the Future of Science and Spirit, written with Michael Shermer, a science writer and skeptic. In 2023, he debated Shermer at the How The Light Gets In festival in Hay-on-Wye, UK. That same year, he discussed the existence of consciousness outside the brain at the University Aula in Bergen, Norway, alongside anthropologist Tanya Luhrmann and neuroscientist Anil Seth.

Sheldrake described his spiritual practices in two books: Science and Spiritual Practices (2017) and Ways to Go Beyond and Why They Work (2019).

Selected books

Reviews of Sheldrake's books have sometimes been very negative about their scientific content, but some have been positive. In 2009, Adam Rutherford, a geneticist and deputy editor of Nature, criticized Sheldrake's books for containing research that was not reviewed by other scientists, as is expected in science. He suggested that the books should be "ignored."

In his 1981 book A New Science of Life: The Hypothesis of Morphic Resonance, Sheldrake proposed that certain events, especially biological ones, become more likely to happen if they occur frequently. He argued that patterns from past events influence future growth and behavior, similar to an idea called Lamarckian inheritance. He also claimed that this concept could explain many scientific topics, such as evolution and natural laws, which he described as habits that have changed over time since the Big Bang.

John Davy, writing in The Observer, said the book's ideas were "fascinating and far-reaching" and could challenge traditional scientific views. He added that the book would "merit attention" if experiments supported its claims.

In later books, Sheldrake continued to promote the idea of morphic resonance. However, many critics reject the hypothesis, calling it pseudoscience and magical thinking. They argue there is no strong evidence for it, and it conflicts with established scientific theories. Some say the idea is too vague and cannot be proven false. Sheldrake's experiments have also been criticized for poor design and possible bias in how results were analyzed.

Alex Gomez-Marin said Sheldrake's idea is not unfalsifiable, but no conclusive experiments have been done, as mainstream scientists avoid testing it.

In The Presence of the Past: Morphic Resonance and the Habits of Nature (1988), Sheldrake expanded on his theory and presented what he called experimental evidence. The book was praised by New Scientist reviewer Theodore Roszak, who called it "engaging, provocative" and "a tour de force." However, when the book was reissued in 2011, New Scientist noted that opinions had shifted, and Sheldrake was now seen as working on the "wilder shores of science."

In a 1988 review, The Times writer David E. H. Jones called the hypothesis "magical thinking" and "pseudoscience," saying it was too broad to explain anything clearly. He criticized Sheldrake for creating theories without solid evidence and argued that without proof, the theory would be dismissed by scientists.

Sheldrake's 1991 book The Rebirth of Nature: The Greening of Science and God discussed New Age ideas about nature. A Guardian column said the book aimed to revive the idea that nature is "alive," quoting Sheldrake as saying that "indeterminism, spontaneity, and creativity" are found in nature. James Lovelock, writing in Nature, said the book's theory made testable predictions but noted that no evidence had changed mainstream science.

In 1994, Sheldrake proposed a list of seven experiments that could change the world, encouraging people to test his ideas. The Sunday Times music critic Mark Edwards praised the book, saying it challenged scientists' confidence in their theories.

In The Lancet, David Sharp warned that experiments on paranormal phenomena might be biased and said the scientific community would need to reconsider if such ideas were proven. He encouraged scientists to read Sheldrake's work and test his experiments carefully.

Nigel Hawkes of The Times wrote that Sheldrake was trying to connect science with ideas about perception and suggested that dogs might seem to have psychic abilities but were actually using normal senses. He said scientists might not take Sheldrake seriously, but the book would cause "harmless fun."

In Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home, Sheldrake studied whether dogs could sense their owners' return. He argued that telepathy between humans and animals might be real and linked it to morphic fields. The book has three sections: telepathy, sense of direction (including animal migration), and animal precognition (like predicting earthquakes).

Sheldrake examined over 1,000 cases of dogs and cats that seemed to wait for their owners. He tested a dog named Jaytee by filming it continuously during its owner's absence. In 100 tests, Jaytee spent much more time at the window when its owner was returning than when she was not. Sheldrake said the results were statistically significant. He repeated the tests with different vehicles and found similar results. He also tested another dog, Kane, with similar findings.

Before publishing the book, Sheldrake invited Richard Wiseman and Matth to review his work.

Public reception

Sheldrake's ideas have been discussed in academic journals and books. His work has also been covered in newspapers, radio, television, and speaking events. The attention he receives has caused concern that it might hurt how the public understands science. Some people have accused Sheldrake of promoting himself. Steven Rose said, "for those who create these hypotheses, the rewards include instant fame that is harder to get through regular scientific work."

A variety of responses to Sheldrake's ideas have been published in important scientific journals.

In 1982, Sheldrake and theoretical physicist David Bohm wrote a dialogue in which they compared Sheldrake's ideas to Bohm's implicate order. In 1997, physicist Hans-Peter Dürr talked about Sheldrake's work in relation to modern physics.

After the publication of A New Science of Life, New Scientist organized a competition to create tests for morphic resonance. The winning idea was learning Turkish nursery rhymes. Psychologist and broadcaster Sue Blackmore's entry, which involved babies' behavior, came second. Blackmore found the results did not support morphic resonance.

In 2005, the Journal of Consciousness Studies published a special issue about Sheldrake's work on the feeling of being stared at. The editor could not follow the journal's standard peer-review process because "making successful blind peer review a condition of publication would have stopped the project from starting." The issue included several articles by Sheldrake, followed by open peer review, to which Sheldrake responded. Michael Shermer rated the peer commentaries in Scientific American and said the more supportive reviews came from those with connections to less mainstream institutions.

Sheldrake denies that DNA contains a recipe for morphological development. He and developmental biologist Lewis Wolpert made a scientific bet about the importance of DNA in the developing organism. Wolpert bet Sheldrake "a case of fine port" that "By 1 May 2029, given the genome of a fertilized egg of an animal or plant, we will be able to predict in at least one case all the details of the organism that develops from it, including any abnormalities." The Royal Society will decide the winner if the result is not clear.

In September 1981, Nature's senior editor, John Maddox, published an editorial about A New Science of Life titled "A book for burning?" It said:

Sheldrake's book is a good example of a common misunderstanding about what science is. In reality, Sheldrake's argument is not scientific but an example of pseudo-science. Many readers may think Sheldrake has found a place for magic in scientific discussion—and this may have been his goal.

Maddox argued that Sheldrake's hypothesis was not testable or "falsifiable in Popper's sense," referring to philosopher Karl Popper. He said Sheldrake's proposals for testing his hypothesis were "time-consuming, inconclusive, and impractical." Maddox rejected the idea that the book should be burned, but his editorial's title gained widespread attention. Nature later published letters criticizing the editorial, including one from physicist Brian Josephson, who said Maddox failed to consider the possibility that real physical facts may exist outside current scientific descriptions.

In 1983, an editorial in The Guardian compared the "anger of the scientific establishment" against Sheldrake to the Galileo affair and Lysenkoism. Brian Charlesworth responded in the same paper, saying the ultimate test of a scientific theory is its agreement with observations and experiments. He added that "vitalistic and Lamarckian ideas" have failed this test.

In a letter to The Guardian in 1988, a scientist from Glasgow University said the title "A book for burning?" was used to attract attention and criticized the idea that Maddox ever supported burning Sheldrake's book. In 1999, Maddox said his 1981 editorial was "injudicious," noting that even though it concluded the book should not be burned, it was placed among "literature of intellectual aberration." He added that Sheldrake's publishers used the editorial to suggest the scientific establishment was suppressing truths.

An editor for Nature said in 2009 that Maddox's reference to book burning backfired.

In 2012, Sheldrake described his time after Maddox's review as being "exactly like a papal excommunication. From that moment on, I became a very dangerous person to know for scientists."

During 1987 and 1988, Sheldrake wrote several articles for The Guardian's "Body and Soul" column. In one, he wrote that the idea that "memories were stored in our brains" was "only a theory" and "despite decades of research, the phenomenon of memory remains mysterious." This led to a response by Steven Rose, a neuroscientist

Origin and philosophy of morphic resonance

Sheldrake was influenced early in his life by a book titled The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), written by Thomas Kuhn. He said this book helped him see modern scientific ideas about life as a way of thinking, which he called "the mechanistic theory of life." Reading Kuhn’s work made Sheldrake focus on how scientific ways of thinking can change over time.

Sheldrake explains that although morphic resonance shares some ideas with Hinduism’s concept of akashic records, he first thought of the idea while studying at Cambridge University, before traveling to India. He credits two main influences for his idea: his studies of biology’s holistic traditions and a book by French philosopher Henri Bergson titled Matter and Memory (1896). He took Bergson’s idea that memories are not physically stored in the brain and expanded it to morphic resonance, where memories are not only not physical but also shaped by the shared memories of similar living things. While some scientists at Cambridge did not support his idea, people in India were more open to it. Indian colleagues told him, "There is nothing new in this; ancient rishis knew this long ago." Sheldrake describes morphic resonance as a meeting of Western and Eastern ideas, even though he developed it first in Western philosophy.

Sheldrake also notes that morphic resonance has similarities to Carl Jung’s idea of the collective unconscious, which suggests that shared memories and repeated behaviors, called archetypes, exist across people. However, Jung believed these patterns were passed down through physical inheritance, while Sheldrake attributes them to morphic resonance and rejects the idea of "mechanistic biology," which explains life through physical processes alone.

Lewis Wolpert, a critic of Sheldrake, has compared morphic resonance to a modern version of Drieschian vitalism, a theory that suggests life depends on non-physical forces.

Personal life

Sheldrake is married to Jill Purce, who is a therapist, voice teacher, and author. They have two sons: Merlin Sheldrake, a biologist, and Cosmo Sheldrake, a musician. Merlin Sheldrake is a mycologist, which means he studies fungi, and he wrote a book titled Entangled Life: How fungi make our worlds, change our minds and shape our futures.

Sheldrake is an Anglican Christian. He has said that he studied with a Sufi teacher and practiced Sufism during his time in India. He also said that he returned to a Christian path during his time in India.