Anatheism: Rediscovering God in a Secular Age

March 20th, 2024
St. James's Church, London

In this talk, Rupert Sheldrake explores the theme of finding God again, in an increasingly secular society. Drawing from personal experiences in India and his journey through various spiritual traditions, Rupert provides insights into anatheism, or returning to God, and how this process is unfolding in a post-Christian world. He touches on the connections between science and spirituality, the value of pilgrimage and sacred places, and the emerging concept of panpsychism, which considers consciousness as a fundamental quality in nature. An engaging Q&A session with the audience dives deeper into perennial philosophy, the role of feminine energy in Christianity, and the impact of psychedelics on spiritual practices.

Chapters:
00:00:00 - Introduction and Rupert Sheldrake's Early Life
00:00:28 - Anatheism and Rediscovering God
00:01:38 - Secular Society and Belief Systems
00:02:29 - Diverse Spiritual Traditions and Modern Challenges
00:04:12 - Sheldrake's Childhood, Boarding School, and Methodism
00:08:14 - Transition to Atheism and Science Education
00:12:59 - Morphic Resonance and Intellectual Crisis
00:15:24 - Scholarship at Harvard and Intellectual Shift
00:16:20 - Thomas Kuhn and Scientific Paradigms
00:20:15 - Epiphany Philosophers and New Directions
00:24:08 - Discovering Morphic Resonance and New Research Paths
00:26:01 - Time in India and Influence on Research
00:32:10 - Work in Plant Development and Spiritual Awakening
00:34:09 - Immersed in Indian and Tibetan Traditions
00:38:17 - Spiritual Advice from a Hindu Guru
00:41:25 - Father Bede Griffiths and Catholic Mysticism
00:46:12 - The Trinity and Sacred Mysticism
00:48:35 - Logos and Holy Spirit
00:52:07 - Panpsychism and Cosmic Mind
00:57:06 - Scientific Research and Spiritual Practices
01:00:07 - Revival of Pilgrimage and Urban Spiritual Centers
01:03:40 - Audience Question 1: Perennial Philosophy and Interfaith Dialog
01:07:51 - Audience Question 2: Role of Feminine Energy in Christianity
01:12:25 - Audience Question 3: Philosophy, Technology, and Connection with the Divine
01:19:20 - Audience Question 4: Encounters with Krishnamurti and David Bohm

Alternatives is a UK-based organization offering spiritual and personal growth events. For over 30 years they've hosted talks, workshops, and resources focused on spirituality, well-being, and conscious business at St James' Church in Piccadilly.

Dr Rupert Sheldrake, PhD, is a biologist and author best known for his hypothesis of morphic resonance. At Cambridge University he worked in developmental biology as a Fellow of Clare College. He was Principal Plant Physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics and From 2005 to 2010 was Director of the Perrott-Warrick project, Cambridge.

[nottees]

One of the best reasons to visit planet earth is to enjoy a Rupert Sheldrake lecture.

[dorotheaderickson]

What a gem of a human being! If people like Rupert were running the world, there would be hope for the future!

[Princess]

I've long been conflicted and burdened with what seemed a jarring clash between Catholicism, my love of Jesus, Mother Mary, Mary Magdalene and a life-long fascination with paganism and Hinduism. Rupert helped me to make some peace of the confliction. A soothing, eloquent talk from a beautiful soul. Thank you, Rupert and Peace Be With You.

[elizabethecarlisle]

Rupert Sheldrake is such a truly stellar human being.

[mandyshanks]

I love the idea of the moon reflected in buckets of water set differently. Each bucket reflects one moon. We are all reflections of consciousness. What a beautiful and gentle bucket of consciousness Rupert is.

[SanguineUltima]

Fantastic lecture! I've felt a strong animosity towards the militant atheism and mechanical materialism of the scientific community for the better part of my life. When I hear someone like you speak with such depth and eloquence about the beautiful mysteries of life, with such respect for organisms and the mystery traditions of the world, it really makes me wish this was the majority paradigm we inhabited. God Bless you!

[SepulvedaBoulevard]

After an apostasy of forty years, I find myself joyfully responding to the call back to my native faith, which is now stronger and more substantial than ever. There's nothing like a good sojourn in the wilderness to help you complete your circle.

[beerman]

Rupert's insights and history are as elegant as his speech ..

[timothytannerandtheamazing]

An intellectual powerhouse with spiritual depth - that's Rupert Sheldrake - a wonderful man to behold! 🙏

[marcobiagini]

I am a physicist and I will explain why our scientific knowledge refutes the idea that consciousness is generated by the brain and that the origin of our mental experiences is physical/biological .
My argument proves that the fragmentary structure of brain processes implies that brain processes are not a sufficient condition for the existence of consciousness, which existence implies the existence in us of an indivisible unphysical element, which is usually called soul or spirit (in my youtube channel you can find a video with more detailed explanations). I also argue that all emergent properties are subjective cognitive contructs used to approximately describe underlying physical processes, and that these descriptions refer only to mind-dependent entities. Consciousness, being implied by these cognitive contructs, cannot itself be an emergent property.

Preliminary considerations: the concept of set refers to something that has an intrinsically conceptual and subjective nature and implies the arbitrary choice of determining which elements are to be included in the set; what exists objectively are only the single elements. In fact, when we define a set, it is like drawing an imaginary line that separates some elements from all the other elements; obviously this imaginary line does not exist physically, independently of our mind, and therefore any set is just an abstract and subjective cognitive construct and not a physical entity and so are all its properties. Similar considerations can be made for a sequence of elementary processes; sequence is a subjective and abstract concept.

Mental experience is a precondition for the existence of subjectivity/arbitrariness and cognitive constructs, therefore mental experience cannot itself be a cognitive construct; obviously we can conceive the concept of consciousness, but the concept of consciousness is not actual consciousness.
(With the word consciousness I do not refer to self-awareness, but to the property of being conscious= having a mental experiences such as sensations, emotions, thoughts, memories and even dreams).

From the above considerations it follows that only indivisible elements may exist objectively and independently of consciousness, and consequently the only logically coherent and significant statement is that consciousness exists as a property of an indivisible element. Furthermore, this indivisible entity must interact globally with brain processes because we know that there is a correlation between brain processes and consciousness. This indivisible entity is not physical, since according to the laws of physics, there is no physical entity with such properties; therefore this indivisible entity can be identified with what is traditionally called soul or spirit. The soul is the missing element that interprets globally the distinct elementary physical processes occurring at separate points in the brain as a unified mental experience.

Some clarifications.

The brain doesn't objectively and physically exist as a mind-independent entity since we create the concept of the brain by separating an arbitrarily chosen group of quantum particles from everything else. This separation is not done on the basis of the laws of physics, but using addictional subjective criteria, independent of the laws of physics; actually there is a continuous exchange of molecules with the blood and when and how such molecules start and stop being part of the brain is decided arbitrarily. Brain processes consist of many parallel sequences of ordinary elementary physical processes occurring at separate points. There is no direct connection between the separate points in the brain and such connections are just a subjective abstractions used to approximately describe sequences of many distinct physical processes. Indeed, considering consciousness as a property of an entire sequence of elementary processes implies the arbitrary definition of the entire sequence; the entire sequence as a whole (and therefore every function/property/capacity attributed to the brain) is a subjective abstraction that does not refer to any mind-independendent reality.

Physicalism/naturalism is based on the belief that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. However, an emergent property is defined as a property that is possessed by a set of elements that its individual components do not possess; my arguments prove that this definition implies that emergent properties are only subjective cognitive constructs and therefore, consciousness cannot be an emergent property.
Actually, all the alleged emergent properties are just simplified and approximate descriptions or subjective/arbitrary classifications of underlying physical processes or properties, which are described directly by the fundamental laws of physics alone, without involving any emergent properties (arbitrariness/subjectivity is involved when more than one option is possible; in this case, more than one possible description). An approximate description is only an abstract idea, and no actual entity exists per se corresponding to that approximate description, simply because an actual entity is exactly what it is and not an approximation of itself. What physically exists are the underlying physical processes. Emergence is nothing more than a cognitive construct that is applied to physical phenomena, and cognition itself can only come from a mind; thus emergence can never explain mental experience as, by itself, it implies mental experience.

My approach is scientific and is based on our scientific knowledge of the physical processes that occur in the brain; my arguments prove that such scientific knowledge excludes the possibility that the physical processes that occur in the brain could be a sufficient condition for the existence of consciousness.

Marco Biagini

[heidiankers]

Marvellous human Being, I've followed him for almost 40!years, a kind teacher.its wonderful to grow old as he grows older.

[suecondon]

Always such a fascinating man! Love this, I could listen to Rupert for hours ❤

[DanielEngsvang]

I live in Sweden but knows English very well, but use to have the "subtitle function" On because i sometimes don't get certain words because of dialects, but it's funny sometimes and just now i saw this : "The Anarchism(Ana-theism), The Rediscovery of god that's going on", haha. I love listening to Rupert, he's a very wise man indeed. Cheers

[tzmythos]

Very enjoyable and stimulating talk and I must say that listening to Rupert is an aesthetic experience for me as well... his voice, humility, gentleness and humor. So glad I watched this.

[kaboom]

I love this man. There’s something incredibly magical about him. What a treasure he is to our world

[hexxan]

What an incredible gem this man is... And then realize that each and every one of us could sparkle like he does, each in our own magnificent individual colors and fields... ❤❤❤

[meereslicht]

Maravillosa!! Sus recuerdos tienen un gran valor histórico y teórico para comprender las limitaciones de la epistemología o filosofía de la ciencia del siglo 20. Una verdadera joya. 🙂🙂👍👍👌👌🤗🤗👏👏👏

[reiniergamboa]

Brilliant! You are a gift to this world. Thank you.

[alien_bot]

God! I finally understand what you have been saying all these years! I wish everyone could see. It's so beautiful!

[duncanmckeown]

I feel there is always so much to learn from Rupert. I intended to listen to some of this and go to bed...and I stayed, rivetted, for the whole hour and a half!