Fw:number 1 [ROSEN] MR as ontological, Fechner

["Judith Rosen" <***>]

Hi Everyone,

I believe some of the posts I have been making over the last week or so have
not actually gotten to the list. The following is one of them, and I will be
resending the others too. If they are redundant, please forgive me and
delete.
From: "Judith Rosen" <***>
To: <***>
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: [ROSEN] MR as ontological, Fechner


>
> John K. wrote:
> > In particular, Rosen identifies everything as being complex.
>
> I need clarification on this statement, John. My father only identified
> everything ALIVE as being complex. That's the only guarantee you will
have--
> that if it is alive, then you know without checking that it is complex. It
> doesn't follow the other way. The notion that all of the material world is
> complex was asserted by others--but imputed to Robert Rosen-- and was a
> claim that I DISputed as being asserted by my father. His only assertion
in
> that direction was that atoms are complex as he uses the term. But he made
a
> clear distinction between systems that were complex because of their
> organization and other systems, created out of atoms, of course, but which
> had an organization that fell short of his definition of complexity. This
> has been a source of misunderstanding all along with his work and has led
to
> some big disagreements! But it is true, nonetheless.
>
> The question for most people seems to be; How can a system be non-complex
if
> it has other systems, complex systems, even living systems, in it's
> organization as "components"? You actually phrased the answer beautifully
in
> an earlier post regarding how the global ecosystem is not an organism. So
I
> need clarification on what you mean by the above statement or I don't
> understand.

> Judith