Re: The Goal of this List

[Tim Gwinn <***>]

Howard,

If you have issues with Rosen's paradigm and writings, I suggest you
unsubscribe from the list. The premise of the list is based on the paradigm
he presents therein. Since he continued to promote these views in spite of
your contact with him as a colleague, then I do not see that it is fruitful
to try to raise such criticisms now - at least within this list.

Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ROSEN Forum [mailto:*** Behalf Of Howard
> Pattee
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 7:20 AM
> To: ***
> Subject: Re: The Goal of this List
>
>
> Tim,
> You define the goal of your list as: the discussion and
> advancement of the concepts and work of theoretical biologist
> Robert Rosen.
>
> HP: That is worthy goal to which I would like to contribute, and
> I have suggested some current research areas where Bob?s ideas
> might be advanced as well as offered criticism. The subject is
> profound and requires many approaches. To me advancing Bob?s
> ideas does not mean just interpreting everything Bob has written
> as the final word. History makes clear that advancement of
> profound concepts requires more than hermeneutics. In science at
> least, ideas are highly competitive and without actively engaging
> in dialog with critics and without comparison with alternative
> approaches, any concept will become extinct simply by default.
>
> Can anyone think of any accepted scientific concept or theory
> that was born perfect or expressed ideally? Does anyone know a
> theory that did not go through years of severe critical disputes?
> Either the theory died or, in the end, come out the better for
> these disputes.
>
> Keep in mind that Bob has himself engaged in severe (some would
> say inflammatory) criticism of the entire fields of physics and
> biology and specific areas of research as well as ideas of
> individuals. This is all very well and part of the game, but one
> would be delusional if one expected Bob to get a free pass exempt
> from response from the scientific community. Failure to engage in
> such critical response by excluding it from this list would not
> in my view contribute to the advancement of Bob?s ideas.
>
> Of course if you disagree, it is your list and your choice. Would
> you prefer that I limit my posts to the points of agreement I
> have with Bob?
>
> Howard
>
>
>
> >
> > From: Tim Gwinn <***>
> > Date: 2004/04/21 Wed PM 05:52:27 EDT
> > To: ***
> > Subject: The Goal of this List
> >
> > JJK wrote:
> > > We have to ask first and foremost why we converse at all, I
> mean what is
> > > the goal? The desired outcome?
> >
> > The goal on this list is: the discussion and advancement of the
> concepts and
> > work of theoretical biologist Robert Rosen.
> >
> > I remind everyone that this forum is not intended as a general
> complexity or
> > systems discussion list. Hence it will have a significant prima facie
> > philosophical bias toward Rosen's views of science,
> epistemology, life and
> > biology. If anyone considers that focus and bias to be
> unacceptable, then
> > their time is not well-spent on this list.
> >
> > I think some of this recent discussion has shown that perhaps
> there is the
> > need for a more broadly-based complexity-and-biology discussion
> list on the
> > internet. It is not my intention nor my interest to host such a list. If
> > some wants to start one, I'll offer them what help I can.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tim
> >