On Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:30:33 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:10 AM, Craig Weinberg 
> <whats...@gmail.com<javascript:>> 
> wrote: 
>
> >> Metabolism involves replacing parts of cells that break down with 
> >> inanimate matter from the environment. The cells may or may not have 
> >> experiences associated with them but apparently this process preserves 
> >> the experiences. A car may have experiences and replacing the worn out 
> >> car parts preserves the car's function and may also preserve the car's 
> >> experiences. In what way is maintenance of cells fundamentally 
> >> different to maintenance of cars? 
> > 
> > 
> > The difference is that cells only metabolize when they are alive. A car 
> was 
> > never alive so it has to be maintained externally and can't heal itself. 
> The 
> > car is also not really one thing but thousands of parts assembled to act 
> as 
> > if it were one thing. An organism is completely different in that it is 
> > really one cell which has grown and replicated through its own sense and 
> > motives into a body. The body isn't an assembly of cells acting like a 
> body, 
> > it is a single organism on one level and many organs and organisms on 
> other 
> > levels. Just because cells perform mechanical functions also doesn't 
> mean 
> > that they are machines. 
>
> Craig, have you ever worked in a biology lab? Have you ever discussed 
> these ideas in person with a biology teacher at school or university? 
> It's not even that you're wrong, it's that you've completely missed 
> the point of the last two centuries years of biological science, which 
> essentially consists in treating living organisms as understandable 
> machines rather than mysterious spirits. 
>
>
The problem is the assumption that they can only be one thing if they 
aren't the other. This kind of dualism is a prejudice of a particular phase 
of scientific development that is overdue for reconciliation. By framing it 
as 'understandable vs mysterious' instead of public-spatial vs 
private-temporal, we close off all possibility for progress. Do you think 
that I don't know how effective the reductionist approach has been for 
Western Civilization? The Catholic Church was deemed equally effective 
during Galileo's time. You misunderstand my perspective and assume that I 
am talking about some new force outside of physics when what I am doing is 
showing a way of integrating the obvious conditions of our experience with 
physics.

 I think that realizing that cells are also our sub-personal experiences 
will be the next two centuries of biological science.

Craig
 

>
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/iY0akvYNUp4J.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to