Re: Life without evolution/evolution without life?

[Judith Rosen <***>]

I think the difference in emphasis between the extensive discussion on
adaptation and evolution in "Anticipatory Systems" and the terse mention in
"Life, Itself" is due to the nature of each of those books. Life Itself is a
book about Complexity, because that's what makes life possible. In order to
discuss the answer to "Why life?" he needed to lay the groundwork for the
answer which is "Because Complexity." It's really the history of his journey
from his initial preconceived expectations as a young scientist to what he
ended up doing (reformulating the foundations of science, itself) in order
to finally be able to answer his own question.

Anticipatory Systems, on the other hand, was a book about biological systems
(living systems) and this peculiar behavior they exhibit. Adaptation and
evolution are two processes that he felt could only happen in the very same
systems that naturally exhibit anticipatory behavior, and in fact these
things illuminate each other. Complexity, of course, is prominently figured
in this book, but it's not as wide ranging as Life, Itself is.

Judith

----- Original Message -----
From: "Howard Pattee" <***>
To: <***>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [ROSEN] Life without evolution/evolution without life?


> Tim,
>
> I think we only have a small problem of interpretation.
>
> Tim:I don't see any inconsistency at all between Rosen's remarks on
evolution in Life Itself and his stance in Anticipatory System.
>
> Howard: No one has suggested inconsistency. I do find a significant change
in Bob's view of the importance of adaptation and evolution. In AS there is
an entire chapter on Adaptation, Natural Selection and Evolution that Bob
begins by saying: "This [adaptation] is an idea utterly basic to the
biological realm, and which is becoming increasingly important in the
understanding of the properties and control of social systems and human
sciences."
>
> In LI Bob says, [evolution] may very well be more a property of a
particular realization of life, rather than life itself. Thus it is that the
word "evolution" has hardly been mentioned in the preceding pages." Also, in
LI the word "adaptation" is not even in the index.
>
> I think most readers would find a significant change in attitude from an
"idea utterly basic to the biological realm" to and an idea "hardly
mentioned."
>
> The rest of your post I think is standard evolutionary theory based on a
genetic memory and natural selection that I agree with completely.
>
> Howard