| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jim Menegay
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2003 10:53 pm Post subject: Robert Rosen>s book, "Life Itself" |
 |
|
Has anyone out there read this 1991 book, or any of Rosen>s other
writing? If you look on Amazon, the book gets incredibly glowing
reader reviews. I read "Life Itself" a few years ago.
His views seem interesting to me in relation to the question of
"What is Life?" or the recent thread "a definition of 'living being'"
Rosen is pushing a viewpoint he calls Relational Biology and which
is apparently based on the ideas of Rashevksy. This seems to be
a kind of General Systems Theory, except that instead of the
quantitative mathematics of differential equations, Rosen uses
the qualitative mathematics of category theory. Also shared
with General System Theory is a vague distrust of reductionism.
The interesting thing, to me, is that he uses Aristotle>s taxonomy
of "causality" in a novel way.
It is a cliche that biological systems are open with respect to
material causation - they are thermodynamic open systems.
It is also a foundation of our mechanistic view of nature that they
are closed with respect to final causation - they serve no one>s
purpose but their own.
But Rosen claims that they are also unusual when you look at formal
and efficient causation. Formal cause, of course, means information.
Living systems take no, or almost no, instruction from outside themselves,
if you define "instruction" narrowly. But define it more broadly, and
the ways in which living systems receive information from the outside
world and convert this formal causation into a response (utilizing the
other modes of causation) is quite interesting indeed to biologists.
So is the flow of formal causation from past environments into current
genetics via natural selection.
The key idea, though, relating to attempts to define "Life", has to
do with efficient cause. Rosen claims that living systems are almost
completely closed to efficient causation. Enzymes, for example, can
be viewed as the efficient cause of the product molecule that they
produce. But the efficient cause of the enzyme is itself a molecule
within the cell, as is the efficient cause of that, and so on, ad
infinitum. Life is closed with respect to efficient cause. And no
other system in the universe is closed in this way to both efficient
and final cause.
That is, Rosen thinks that a minimal definition of life has to include
metabolism. In fact, though he doesn>t say this, it apparently has
to be "autopoeic" in the sense of Varella and Maturana.
Therefore, a naked gene would not be alive, by Rosen>s definition,
because it relies on the environment for its "replicase" function
rather than creating that functionality itself. It is open to
efficient cause.
It is not clear how you would APPLY any of these ideas in every day
biology. But, I do think they are interesting at a philosophical
level. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Peter F.
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2003 9:59 pm Post subject: Re: Robert Rosen>s book, "Life Itself" |
|
|
"Jim Menegay" <jamenegay@ra.rockwell.com> wrote in message
news:bsah0h$73d$1@darwin.ediacara.org...
[quote]So is the flow of formal causation from past environments into current
genetics via natural selection.
[/quote]
It makes me sniff *good* blood when I saw you wrote this (and also some of
the things that I snipped).
Because it seems to accord with an important part of my approach - the only
one that works for me - which is to "analyse and categorize into focus" some
of the most often missed (not recognized/not paid evolution-theoretical
attention to) environmental challenges or situations (to individuals) in and
throughout phylogeny (and very much also of key current social and commonly
personal relevance).
As I largely by instinct and trial and error tried to develope this
approach, I was almost constantly up against an obstacle: my own myopic and
reductionistic cognitive and intellectual inclination.
So, I had to both develope a crutch in shape of the "Tolerance Principle",
and train myself to use it.
(I pinched this principle from where I found it derived from the Uncertainty
Principle and coinage by Jakob Bronowski - inside his book The Ascent Of
Man; but at least I have put it to more concrete concEPTual work than
Bronowski ever did.
NB. I did not steal that book!)
[quote]
Therefore, a naked gene would not be alive, by Rosen>s definition,
because it relies on the environment for its "replicase" function
rather than creating that functionality itself. It is open to
efficient cause.
It is not clear how you would APPLY any of these ideas in every day
biology. But, I do think they are interesting at a philosophical
level.
Tom Hendricks (who often writes to s.b.e.) pushes the idea that a living[/quote]
creature has to be an "energy moderator". I like that idea so much that it
has become part of my EPT perspective.
(Seems I have to admit being a klEPTomaniac.)
Regards,
P |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Jim Menegay
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 1:40 am Post subject: Re: Robert Rosen>s book, "Life Itself" |
|
|
"Peter F." <effectivespamblock@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message news:<bsfmkl$1klb$1@darwin.ediacara.org>...
[quote]"Jim Menegay" <jamenegay@ra.rockwell.com> wrote in message
news:bsah0h$73d$1@darwin.ediacara.org...
[snip]
As I largely by instinct and trial and error tried to develope this
approach, I was almost constantly up against an obstacle: my own myopic and
reductionistic cognitive and intellectual inclination.
So, I had to both develope a crutch in shape of the "Tolerance Principle",
and train myself to use it.
(I pinched this principle from where I found it derived from the Uncertainty
Principle and coinage by Jakob Bronowski - inside his book The Ascent Of
Man; but at least I have put it to more concrete concEPTual work than
Bronowski ever did.
NB. I did not steal that book!)
[snip]
Tom Hendricks (who often writes to s.b.e.) pushes the idea that a living
creature has to be an "energy moderator". I like that idea so much that it
has become part of my EPT perspective.
(Seems I have to admit being a klEPTomaniac.)
[/quote]
Peter,
I am not the student of human psychology that you are. But, it has
always struck me as curious that people (myself included) so
enthusiasticly seek to assume the transmitter role in horizontal
meme transfers. This is advantageous to the meme, but not obviously
advantageous to self. Yet, they are strangely reluctant to assume
the receptor role, which can be very advantageous to self.
Probably, the explanation lies in some form of sexual selection.
We are not constructed to improve ourselves - after all, we will
not be around very long in any case. Instead, we are constructed
to make ourselves look good, since our genes may persist. That is
one explanation of the phenomenon, anyways.
Jim |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Peter F.
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2003 12:42 am Post subject: Re: Robert Rosen>s book, "Life Itself" |
|
|
"Jim Menegay" <jamenegay@ra.rockwell.com> wrote in message
news:bsinto$2eev$1@darwin.ediacara.org...
[quote]it has
always struck me as curious that people (myself included) so
enthusiasticly seek to assume the transmitter role in horizontal
meme transfers. This is advantageous to the meme, but not obviously
advantageous to self. Yet, they are strangely reluctant to assume
the receptor role, which can be very advantageous to self.
Probably, the explanation lies in some form of sexual selection.
We are not constructed to improve ourselves - after all, we will
not be around very long in any case. Instead, we are constructed
to make ourselves look good, since our genes may persist. That is
one explanation of the phenomenon, anyways.
[/quote]
That is sure to be part of the equation. Personally I cannot help but also
including the insidiously motivational effect of the type of conditioned-in
neurological states that I prefer to name with the acronym "CURSES" (alt. ~
CCKHHURSES).
I see many of our instincts (~ontogenetically hardwired
neurophysioanatomical patterns) as springboards for behaviours that at the
same time keep CURSES selectively unconscious AND that (after rerouting of
the output from neurons that store these conditioned in subconscious states
of potential fear and anxiety, i.e. store CURSES) as if uses CURSES as an
endogenous fuel for the taking of whatever mental/behavioural "opportunity".
It is obvious that not all "opportunities", that are in some way or for any
reason mentally and behaviourally "taken", also turn-out to be profitable in
the sense of resulting in reproductive success.
E.g., some famous composers and musicians died childless; As far as I know
Shubert and Beethoven are two such. (J.S. Bach on the other hand was very
succedssful in this way, too.)
[Apropos which, I have found it useful - and rather satisfying - to think
about, analyse and explain, ourselves and our AEVASIVE characteristics as
products of "opportunity" and "adversity" type
motivational/selective/evolutionary pressures; and then especially to
fundamentally explain "AEVASIVE" by help of recognizing that throughout our
phylogeny there have been frequent occurrences of overlap between
evolutionary opportunity type pressures and *specifically* a subtype of
life-situational adversity type pressure that I have defined in depth and I
refer to as "selective Hibernation imploring type situations".]
Best regards,
Peter
(pusher of my EPT memes) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
TomHendricks474
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2003 12:42 am Post subject: Re: Robert Rosen>s book, "Life Itself" |
|
|
<< Tom Hendricks (who often writes to s.b.e.) pushes the idea that a living
creature has to be an "energy moderator". I like that idea so much that it
has become part of my EPT perspective.
(Seems I have to admit being a klEPTomaniac.)
Or a 'klep-TOM-aniac. And I couldn>t be more delighted.
Tom, as in...
Regards,
<< P >> |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Peter F.
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 12:09 am Post subject: Re: Robert Rosen>s book, "Life Itself" |
|
|
You got me good! :-)
You did it, TO_Me! :-)
The author of EPT has been outpointed! %-<
Cheers Tom,
Peter
"TomHendricks474" <tomhendricks474@cs.com> wrote in message
news:bsl8u3$6o8$1@darwin.ediacara.org...
[quote]Tom Hendricks (who often writes to s.b.e.) pushes the idea that a
living
creature has to be an "energy moderator". I like that idea so much that it
has become part of my EPT perspective.
(Seems I have to admit being a klEPTomaniac.)
Or a 'klep-TOM-aniac. And I couldn>t be more delighted.
Tom, as in...
Regards,
P
[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
