MD what is life?

From: Nathan Pila (pila@sympatico.ca)
Date: Sun Nov 16 2003 - 02:51:42 GMT

  • Next message: Nathan Pila: "Re: MD life is an emergent property"

    Hi there Steve,

    Well, I would assert that the study of "life" is worthwhile even if it is an
    illusion. Right now, a definition that is accepted by everyone has yet to be
    formulated. How can one tell if some material is "alive". What properties
    would such material exhibit?

    How would you, (Steve)/ (or anyone else) /define 'life'? I am aware that I
    am not being fair here in that this question is easy to state and terribly
    difficult to answer. But if you have the time, I would be interested in some
    of the properties that you think 'life' has. I have some views on the
    subject based on some stuff I've read. But I would like to hear what you
    write first.

    Regards, Nathan

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Steve Peterson" <peterson.steve@verizon.net>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 5:02 PM
    Subject: Re: MD out of our depth

    > Hi Nathan,
    >
    > > The human mind ...
    >
    > I'll read "brain." You might consider a software/hardware sort of
    > distinction.
    >
    > >...did not develop as a organ to solve philosophical problems.
    >
    > Agree.
    >
    > > Rather, it evolved for a very different purpose. In that it is like the
    heart,
    > > lungs, or kidneys; that is, the brain has a specific job to fill namely
    to
    > > simply enhance the reproductive success of the body within which it
    resides.
    >
    > I agree. The brain is a biological organ that evolved to fulfill
    biological
    > needs.
    >
    > > This is the biological purpose of every mind, human as well as animal,
    and
    > > moreover, it is its only purpose.
    >
    > (I'm still reading "brain" rather than "mind") I don't know how you
    > conclude that "it is its only purpose." Modern homo sapiens brains now
    also
    > serve social and intellectual purposes.
    >
    > Why not take a broader view of evolution? A brief history of the
    world....
    > Life evolved out of an inorganic physical setting which seeks stability
    and
    > balance and went off to serve its own purpose of preserving itself in what
    > can be seen as a sort of defiance of physical laws as, for example,
    animals
    > move about and even fly rather than simply succumbing to the pull of
    > gravity. Humans eventually created societies which helped to preserve
    life
    > and fulfill biological needs, but these societies have also found their
    own
    > purposes and continue to seek them in defiance of the law of the jungle.
    > Out of established societies intellect evolved which at first had the
    > purpose of preserving society and making life physically easier, but
    > intellect too has found its own purposes in creating philosophy and
    > literature and art.
    >
    > Each stage of evolution evolved to serve the purposes of lower stages but
    > has gone on to serve itself. Each level is a moral code: the laws of
    > physics, the law of the jungle, the morality of society, and the rules of
    > rational thought. The value that holds an idea together is qualitatively
    > different than the value that holds society together which is different
    from
    > the value that preserves life which is different from the value that holds
    > physical materials together.
    >
    > Now I'm getting into the heart of Lila which I'd rather not do. It would
    be
    > better for you to read it than to for me to try to summarize. But I want
    > to say that reducing intellectual and social experiences to biological
    ones
    > as you are trying to do is as absurd as trying to explain biological
    > experiences with the laws of physics. If society and intellect like
    > consciousness are merely emergent properties (like wetness as you say),
    > isn't life also merely an emergent property that then doesn't really
    exist?
    > Are biologists also just deluded into thinking that there is something to
    > study?
    >
    > Regards,
    > Steve
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    > Mail Archives:
    > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    > Nov '02 Onward -
    http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    >
    > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    >

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 16 2003 - 02:52:11 GMT