Waldemar:
Good summary (so, let's talk about "investments" and "justifications") . . . !!
I'm very big on the subject of responsibility. Accordingly, I tend to focus my efforts on those things for which I'm responsible -- which, as it turns out, and as reflected in the organization of my Center, means "explaining" our current situation to those who are actually responsible for "making" *robots* and using CRISPR &c. Not the distant past or distant future. Explaining "today," today.
My responsibility is to talk with others who are also responsible. And so on. (Btw, I got that responsibility from my father, who, in turn, took it from his mentor, Norbert Wiener, who got it from his father, and so on.)
Recently a group from the Center engaged with a conference at NYU billed as "Posthuman Ethics." It was mostly the sort of silliness that you'd expect from such a group, until a professor from Stony Brook got up and read them the riot-act by constructing a scary CRISPR scenario -- revolving around what is (or is not) actually going on today at Brookhaven Labs (managed by Stony Brook).
He correctly said that "the nerds in the labcoats have no interest in your fancy philosophy" (and I've had similar experiences in China and elsewhere).
So, in my case, the goal is taking responsibility for my part in the wider puzzle, under radically different conditions in a baffling *new* paradigm (in which virtually everything that we thought we understood from the previous one is no longer valid) . . . !!
Mark
P.S. As I hope I've made clear, I see *zero* reason why LIFE should obey the "same rules" as MATTER (contra L.L. Whyte &al). Therefore, LIFE doesn't "violate" anything and, indeed, the 2nd Law simply doesn't apply (btw, a conclusion I reached as a PhD student nearly 50 years ago). This becomes important when "complexity science" is introduced, since this is the modern re-formulation of the 2nd Law, based on "chaotic" astro-physics -- yes, done as another attempt to "unify" science. I've spent a lot of time with these folks and have concluded that they have gotten it all wrong (and are nasty about it, to boot). When they try to extend this to MIND and CULTURE it just becomes stupid. My suspicion is that these errors are the result of ignorance of Aristotle's "Four Causes," which, as I've suggested, are *all* needed to "integrate" Human Knowledge.
Quoting JOHN TORDAY <[log in to unmask]>:
Dear Waldemar and ToKers, I greatly appreciate the 'comparison and
contrast' between my way of
thinking about evolution and Mark's. Waldemar characterized what I had to
say quite well. I would
only like to add that the Self-referential Self-organizing character of
life is of great importance, as are
the First Principles of Physiology, upon which life is founded. Without
those aspects there is no explanation
for how and why life exists far from thermal equilibrium, in violation of
the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
The ambiguous nature of life due to this violation is the consequence of
that 'cheating', and life functions through
deception as a means of coping with the ambiguity, lacking a way of
understanding the principles involved in the
processes of life, up until then, but always with the knowledge of
'something greater than itself' as the
'echo' of the Singularity/Big Bang, like the physical echo in the form of
the redshift. The reason I
extended the concept back to that state of being is because I had been
successful in tracing the evolutionary
history of life based on the iterative, repeatative, pre-adaptive nature of
the process. Given that,
once I reached the origin of life the question arose as to how and why
biology utilized lipids to form
itself based on Self-referential Self-Organization. So I reverted to the
Singularity that existed
before the Big Bang as the ultimate pre-adaptive state, there being no
other 'template'. As for the basis for the
Self-referential Self-organization, it only stood to reason that there must
have been a huge 'recoil' after the Big
Bang based on Newton's 3rd Law of Motion, that for every action there is an
equal and opposite reaction, hence
the Self-referential Self-organization as the manifestation of that recoil,
matter behaving in a way to stabilize itself
through balanced chemical reactions. Biology co-opts such reactions by
endogenizing them, as described by
Norman Horowitz (Horowitz NH, Hubbard JS. The origin of life. Annu Rev
Genet. 1974;8:393-410).
At that point all of the bases seemed to be covered.
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 4:16 PM, Waldemar Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
multicellular life forms, such as *Homo sapiens sapiens*.
Thanks to both John and Mark.
I appreciate their replies to a request for a statement “defining” their
justifications (a la Henriques).
I remember that Mark has more to say following Gregg’s return.
The explanations provided are helpful and I think I understand them.
However, perhaps it would be best to see if I am on the right track.
To an extent, they seem to be addressing the same thing.
You know the old saw, “they’re the same - - - only different!”
So, let’s distinguish between differences.
Both approaches seem to be making statements about change and adaptation,
though in different time frames.
To wit:
· John appears to be referencing change/adaptation in a
geologic/cosmic time frame.
· In particular, he is not too enamored of the descriptive aspects
of “evolution,” principally because it’s hard or impossible to test the
description and thereby refute or prove the description.
· John perceives value in exploring physiology as a means to test
evolution, the new biology and genetics.
· To John, adaptation to “change” is fundamentally adaptation to the
environment.
· This adaption is accomplished via “endogenization” of the
environment.
· The same fundamental physiologic changes, or varians thereof,
occur repetitively throughout the history of life.
· Indeed, the mechanism involved in the transition from matter to
life, is repeated throughout the history of life and evolution (ie, from
uni- to multicellular life).
· John sees this as a fundamental aspect of the generation of life
out of matter and the “complexification” of life as explained by
“evolution.”
· In other words, John is attracted to “endogenization of the
environment,” and the physiology expressed therein, as the means by which
life not only arose out of matter but also changed from unicellular to*Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD*
I understand and agree with the concept that fundamental physiologic
mechanisms, or variations thereof, constitute a testable methodologic means
by which life arose and became complex.
John sees this (or these) physiologic processes as having been “present”
as far back as the Big Bang.
I, on the other hand, see how these physiologic processes may constitute
how life arose from matter but do not (yet) see how they are involved in
the formation of matter out of the consequences of the Big Bang.
· Mark, appears to be focused on change/adaptation in mankind and
mankind’s complex social nature and products thereof.
· Mark, appears to propose that mankind cleverly uses “tools” (of
various kinds) to not only adapt to nature/life but also to change nature.
· But, also perceives that mankind is mostly insensitive to a double
hermeneutic involved with tool-based change/adaptation. That is, the
tool (or tools) not only modify nature, they also modify us, the tools’
creators.
· Accordingly, the nature of the available tool/s is important.
· Hence, the aphorism that “if your only tool is a hammer, then
every problem appears to be a nail.”
· The timeframe in Mark’s observations is more immediate – such as
centuries, years, months, weeks, and days.
Hence, both are considering the nature and effects of mankind’s
adaptations, but with a different temporal focus or lens.
John claims the physiologic changes date back to the Big Bang and are
universally repeated in addressing adaptational challenges with similar but
variable results, apparently depending on the environment “endogenized” and
the physiology employed in response.
Mark doesn’t appear to be claiming a connection to the Big Bang and
addresses the double hermeneutic implications of tools used to address the
adaptational challenges.
I submit this to Mark and John, as well as to other TOKers, in hopes of
refining my understanding.
Best regards,
Waldemar
PS Welcome back, Gregg.
(Perseveret et Percipiunt)
503.631.8044
*Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value.* (A Einstein)
On Jul 10, 2018, at 3:17 PM, [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Mark:
Thank you for your response.
Alas, what you have provided does not help me as much as I hope it would.
I am like Joe M - I need help figuring this out.
I am looking for your definition of the new paradigm and the old paradigm
which the new one replaced.
For me, the word “paradigm” is well defined by the following:
*paradigm* (*plural* *paradigms
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >*wiktionary.org_wiki_paradigms- 23English&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnz ycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_ 5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP- UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m= bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RC NTO9jKESyZkT0&s=4YCTxbQFCbjGbD _CDMCxjTw51yoJgTyWpQkrKjbaKJ0& e=
)
1. A pattern
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >,wiktionary.org_wiki_pattern&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= O0AI2__8dl5U0tKfA8Dc4BpMdv3Ayi NKkzPFxMQ63HY&e=
a way
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_way&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= hZhs47l_4pGQjJGRBeYM7yVL26lgUx kQx1u2JlZGG1A&e=
of doing
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_doing&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= 18m2MIAX_Eo_9N8lY5pjAQA9b_UsY3 2L2M5u6IfrvnQ&e=
something
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_something& d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vC I4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo 1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYB gjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfd RxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= srf_0qeU2aFdvSwpXZFjKOQ_vKtQvJ r8tECYMpplljc&e=
, *especially
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >*wiktionary.org_wiki_especially &d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7v CI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HP o1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIY BgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nf dRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= ZDJl6BIVxkxSw-xeljxgZWBt4_ b3uFDi_-Sc90bHMcs&e=
(now often pejorative
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_pejorative &d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7v CI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HP o1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIY BgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nf dRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= NDQCNiGwMEjvS0083cRR6SDGDG_5WL COqQEZeKBr8Q8&e=
) a pattern
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_pattern&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= O0AI2__8dl5U0tKfA8Dc4BpMdv3Ayi NKkzPFxMQ63HY&e=
of thought
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >,wiktionary.org_wiki_thought&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=kxt XV951MHNWpdAAGyVigpP-pscfVZ5Nk g86vVZp6Cs&e=
a system
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_system&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=upS 3wT1oxKcdpUl7ONNU_b2cczosWkTKN i3SHlbk_8A&e=
of beliefs
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >,wiktionary.org_wiki_belief&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=ert P49naCJQKqm4DtutObn8GGKQWDIiyN jxmMrF-oRg&e=
a conceptual
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_conceptual &d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7v CI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HP o1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIY BgjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nf dRxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= c7p-zt-G0yDVc5bMO8kGS-Qb5dTG_J ju6zkCplD_New&e=
framework
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_framework& d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vC I4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo 1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYB gjO2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfd RxSOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=Y JCvDUJExhfrCXE3GIkeGKXpYpdIxyH XavZdsPraEBA&e=
.Synonyms: model
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_model- 23English&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnz ycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_ 5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP- UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m= bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RC NTO9jKESyZkT0&s=PX7vYmckhOlsZN rHcCgjEAj5_NB_-TsMmSKS0lOuuY0& e=
, worldview
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_worldview- 23English&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnz ycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_ 5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP- UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m= bCavyhiTimak73nfdRxSOq2ha7M9RC NTO9jKESyZkT0&s=Cvw_BlCKlfAd9x BcVilX12YC0mKf1k9t7A3K0So0NcI& e=
Thomas Kuhn's landmark “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” got
people talking about *paradigm* shifts, to the point the word itself
now suggests an incomplete or biased perspective.
2. An example
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. > servingwiktionary.org_wiki_example&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= SF4NfM4_JB3v5eGL1U2RpmEJdceVBK bqdhkyBYoUDw4&e=
as the model
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_model&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s=xq_ HGAqraTNpjkWSpEuIx8MqqVbRr9-Ob Fp1iEa3oo8&e=
for
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en. >wiktionary.org_wiki_such&d= DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4 uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1I XYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgj O2gOz4-A&m=bCavyhiTimak73nfdRx SOq2ha7M9RCNTO9jKESyZkT0&s= nxPoE1z11gE4-XfoKyoS2OXdhRfF3h XVewtFNDUqXdQ&e=
...
[Message clipped]
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1