Arthur Haswell offers a devastating and delightfully well-argued deconstruction of the absurdities inherent in physicalism and its sibling, illusionism.

CPU inventor and physicist Federico Faggin, together with Prof. Giacomo Mauro D’Ariano, proposes that consciousness is not an emergent property of the brain, but a fundamental aspect of reality itself: quantum fields are conscious and have free will. In this theory, our physical body is a quantum-classical ‘machine,’ operated by free will decisions of quantum fields. Faggin calls the theory ‘Quantum Information Panpsychism’ (QIP) and claims that it can give us testable predictions in the near future. If the theory is correct, it not only will be the most accurate theory of consciousness, it will also solve mysteries around the interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Not only does John von Neumann’s seminal work in the mathematical modelling of quantum mechanics imply the irreducible nature of mind, the resulting idealist understanding of nature could lead to profound, and positive, changes in how we relate to one another and the world at large in the context of our economic system, writes Dr. Cocks.

This is an involved, fairly technical, but deeply rewarding and potentially groundbreaking essay. It posits that the geometry of real (i.e., noumenal) spacetime may be exactly what our mathematical models tell us it is: a complex projective space in which there is no separation between objects and subject. If so, then the implication is that the foundation of the universe is a form of universal consciousness, that the ordinary spacetime we experience is but a perspectival model, and that the very structure of the universe is defined by mental archetypes, or universal ‘ideas.’ Right or wrong, this is one of the most daring but also most explicit and well-articulated ideas underpinning idealism with physical theory, and it surely deserves multiple careful reads.

Can morphic resonance help explain the problem of missing heritability and why memories have not been found in the brain? And are ‘morphic fields’ the same thing as Michael Levin’s bioelectric ‘cognitive glue’? In this interview, Dr. Rupert Sheldrake discusses with Natalia Vorontsova his theory of morphic fields and its implications for our understanding of the mysteries of nature. Dr. Sheldrake is often called a most original thinker, perhaps because throughout his career he has managed to combine open-mindedness with critical scientific thinking.

‘Talking’ to cells without influencing genes or molecules: it can be done by influencing bioelectric fields. By manipulating the bioelectric fields in organisms like planaria and tadpoles, Prof. Michael Levin has shown how eyes and other organs can grow in unconventional locations, how planaria can be ‘told’ to grow two heads, and perhaps most importantly: how cancer cells can be ‘told’ to stop growing in frogs. These promising experiments might lead to groundbreaking new therapeutics. The importance of the pioneering empirical work of Prof. Michael Levin at Tufts University, on the intersection of bioelectricity, regeneration, and cognition, can hardly be overstated. Philosophically, his work has deep implications for how we think about evolution, cognition and consciousness.