Stephen, Your discussion with Nick Thompson on the essence of Evolution sounds remarkably similar to the pre-Socratic arguments "between" Heraclitus and Parmenides on Being <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Being> and Becoming <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becoming_(philosophy)>. The modern version of this eternal discussion seems to have manifested in the metaphysical propositions of Process Philosophy <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/process-philosophy/> that are substantially promoted in Alfred North Whitehead's seminal *Process and Reality* (1978).
" Modern philosophers who appeal to process rather than substance include Nietzsche <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche>, Heidegger <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidegger>, Charles Peirce <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Sanders_Peirce>, Alfred North Whitehead <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_North_Whitehead>, Alan Watts <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Watts>, Robert M. Pirsig <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._Pirsig>, Charles Hartshorne <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Hartshorne>, Arran Gare <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arran_Gare>, Nicholas Rescher <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Rescher>, Colin Wilson <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Wilson>, and Gilles Deleuze <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilles_Deleuze>. In physics Ilya Prigogine <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilya_Prigogine>[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_philosophy#cite_note-3> distinguishes between the "physics of being" and the "physics of becoming". Process philosophy covers not just scientific intuitions and experiences, but can be used as a conceptual bridge to facilitate discussions among religion, philosophy, and science. " - Wikipedia on Process Philosophy I tend to lean in the same direction as you on this topic and I think that is why I have become a devoted student of complexity science (and process philosophy) and the idea of emergence; as Thomas Nagel argues in his *Mind and Cosmos: Why the materialists Neo-Darwinian conception of Nature is almost certainly false* (2012), not everything is reducible to Substance (atoms ... Being) as an explanation of its essence. It seems to me that the "far-from-equilibrium surprises" that evolve through the unpredictable, stochastic process of evolution validate the idea that we live in a non-deterministic reality; but then this gets us into a long discussion or the essence of randomness--or is it just complexity? (local author George Johnson gets into this though in his *Fire in the Mind: Science, Faith, and the Search for Order* (1996) :-) And the nature of Time gets muddled into the discussion as well-- see *Time Reborn: >From the Crisis in Physics to the Future of the Universe* (2014) by physicist Lee Smolin. " > Now that we have more modern descriptions of living systems and > explanations of origin of life, shouldn't our descriptions and explanations > of Evolution change along with it? > " - Stephen Guerin > This conclusion was also reached back in 1989 by Gregoire Nicolis and Ilya Prigogine in their *Exploring Complexity*. "Our physical world is no longer symbolized by the stable and periodic > planetary motions that are at the heart of classical mechanics. It is a > world of instabilities and fluctuations, which are ultimately responsible > for the amazing variety and richness of the forms and structures we see in > nature around us. New concepts and new tools are clearly necessary to > describe nature, in which evolution and pluralism become the key words." - > *Preface > *to *Exploring Comnplexity* (1989) I like the series of books written by Nick Lane and see him as sort of the Carl Sagan of biological evolution. This is a good thing I believe. I have read some of them but not *THE VITAL QUESTION: Energy, evolution, and the origins of complex life (2015).* However, this thread is good motivation to take the dive. :-) This is all very interesting. Wish I knew more ... and probably said less ... -Robert On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Stephen Guerin <stephen.gue...@simtable.com > wrote: > I composed my email before seeing Eric's post. Having now read his email, > I would say let's not get too distracted by Nick Lane's Vital Question for > the task we set ourselves at FRIAM. > > I think Eric's talks bests represents what I was calling the view of life > as gradient dissipation and a property of the ecological whole and less a > property of an individual. > > As a quick summary for the list, Nick and I have had a 10-year back and > forth discussion on evolution since his arrival in Santa Fe. We are setting > ourselves the task of coming to a common definition and perhaps explanation > of mechanism. If we fail to come to agreement, we hope to at least be able > to coherently state each other's position. > > In this context, I was arguing that evolution is a description of the > historical change of the pathways of breakdown (and local buildup) of > gradients and that organisms (and by extension, species) are less a focus > in this description. Tangents on the list into the dynamics of vortices and > tornadoes have been related to the these arguments about > far-from-equilibrium explanations. > > At FRIAM, I argued that we need updated descriptions and explanations of > Evolution in the same way that Chemistry has changed each time we > discovered new concepts like conservation of mass, thermodynamics, the atom > and quantum mechanics. Now that we have more modern descriptions of living > systems and explanations of origin of life, shouldn't our descriptions and > explanations of Evolution change along with it? > > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > stephen.gue...@simtable.com <stephen.gue...@simtable.com> > CEO, Simtable http://www.simtable.com > 1600 Lena St #D1, Santa Fe, NM 87505 > office: (505)995-0206 mobile: (505)577-5828 > twitter: @simtable > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Stephen Guerin < > stephen.gue...@simtable.com> wrote: > >> Nick, >> >> I downloaded Nick Lane's Vital Question book a couple months back. From a >> quick skim I got the sense it was a nice review of much of the work going >> on around non-equilibrium thermodynamic origin of life explanations by the >> "Seventh Day Ventists" (eg second law arguments for the emegence of life >> via gradient dissipation around deep sea vents). In addition to reviewing >> this work, Dr. Lane has original contributions as well. I would recommend >> it for anyone as a great introduction. >> >> In fact our own Eric Smith and Harold Morowitz (who just passed last >> month) work is mentioned in Vital Question. You might check out Eric's >> recent talk at the Aspen Institute ( >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cwvj0XBKlE) which addresses a couple >> questions that came up at FRIAM yesterday. >> >> In particular, I think the talk much more elegantly describes the shift >> to defining life as an ecological pattern from the prior emphasis on the >> individual organism. >> >> on "are viruses alive" Eric challenges the meaning of a "living thing" >> https://youtu.be/0cwvj0XBKlE?t=48m21s >> >> Also Eric's SFI public lecture from a few years back is very relevant: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElMqwgkXguw >> >> _______________________________________________________________________ >> stephen.gue...@simtable.com <stephen.gue...@simtable.com> >> CEO, Simtable http://www.simtable.com >> 1600 Lena St #D1, Santa Fe, NM 87505 >> office: (505)995-0206 mobile: (505)577-5828 >> twitter: @simtable >> >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Nick Thompson < >> nickthomp...@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> Dear Friammers, >>> >>> >>> >>> Today’s meeting of the Mother Church got back to our old discussions of >>> complexity, gradients, and the origin of life. In that connection I urged >>> everybody to read Nick Lane’s, *THE VITAL QUESTION: Energy, evolution, >>> and the origins of complex life.* The fundamental theory is that life >>> was scaffolded by the microstructure and energy flows taking place in deep >>> ocean vents called “white smokers”. I am curious to know if others have >>> read this book, and what you might think of it. >>> >>> >>> >>> Nicholas S. Thompson >>> >>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology >>> >>> Clark University >>> >>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ >>> >>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> >> >> > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
