The term “morphic” originates from the ancient Greek word morphē, meaning “form” or “shape.” It describes the structure, configuration, or outward appearance of something. Across disciplines, “morphic” denotes inherent organization and patterns, providing a framework for understanding physical manifestation.
The Scientific Root in Biology
In mainstream biology, the suffix “-morphic” describes variations in form or structure within species. “Polymorphism” refers to two or more distinct forms or “morphs” within a single population. These forms exist simultaneously, are typically genetically determined, and lead to diverse appearances or traits.
Jaguars, for example, display polymorphism with light, spotted coats or dark, melanistic forms (black panthers). The peppered moth (Biston betularia) also exhibits light and dark forms. Human blood types, like the ABO system, are another genetic polymorphism.
Sexual dimorphism shows distinct differences in appearance between males and females of the same species, beyond their reproductive organs. These include variations in size, coloration, or specific anatomical features. Male peacocks, for instance, have elaborate, iridescent tail feathers, while peahens have more subdued plumage. Male lions possess prominent manes absent in females, and male mandrills exhibit far more vibrant facial coloration and are significantly larger than their female counterparts.
The Theory of Morphic Fields
Beyond established biological definitions, British biologist Rupert Sheldrake proposed the speculative hypothesis of “morphic fields.” These invisible, non-physical fields are hypothesized to shape the development, form, and behavior of organisms.
Sheldrake posits these fields are actual regions of influence guiding self-organizing systems. They influence how things take shape and behave, such as a “protein field” guiding amino acid chains into specific three-dimensional structures.
These fields are suggested to be nested in hierarchies, from subatomic particles to organisms. They contain a type of memory, where repeated patterns become more probable over time, acting as ‘habits’ for nature. Present forms and behaviors are thus influenced by the cumulative history of similar forms and behaviors from the past.
Morphic Resonance Explained
Morphic resonance describes the proposed mechanism by which morphic fields operate. It suggests a non-local, collective memory where past forms and behaviors influence future ones without known physical connection. A new pattern or skill, once established, is thought to become easier for other similar systems to adopt, even if geographically separated.
Sheldrake illustrates this with the crystallization of new chemical compounds. When a novel chemical is first synthesized, it may be difficult to crystallize. Over time, however, the compound is purportedly easier to crystallize globally, as if it has ‘learned’ through collective memory via morphic resonance.
Another example is purported accelerated learning in rats. If rats of a particular breed learn a new maze or trick in one laboratory, the theory suggests rats of the same breed elsewhere learn it more quickly. This ‘contagion’ of form and behavior across space and time is a central tenet, implying a shared, non-physical inheritance beyond genetic transmission.
Scientific Scrutiny and Alternative Explanations
Morphic fields and morphic resonance are not accepted by the mainstream scientific community. These hypotheses are categorized as pseudoscience due to a lack of robust empirical evidence and concerns about testability. Critics point out Sheldrake’s claims are often vague and difficult to falsify, meaning they cannot be definitively proven wrong through experimentation.
Instead, established scientific explanations account for phenomena morphic resonance attempts to address. For instance, the increasing ease of crystallization of new compounds is explained by nucleation theory and the accidental introduction of ‘seed crystals’ into solutions. Tiny particles, even microscopic dust or fragments, can act as nucleation sites, promoting faster, more reliable crystal formation.
Similarly, faster learning in animal populations is attributed to conventional biological and psychological mechanisms. These include genetic predispositions, epigenetics (changes in gene expression not involving alterations to the genetic code), and social learning. Animals can learn through observation, imitation, and direct instruction, and information can spread via social transmission and shared experiences, rather than non-local resonance.