|
Judith, when I said (many times also on this
list) that:
"it reacts and acts" (maybe not exactly with
these words) then
your: "behaves"-- meaning it acts and
reacts -" is not much of a difference.
I bet "ambience" (as my father
referred to the world outside any given system). " was used in talking
to the sci. crowd for understandability of a totally cut (limited model) system
which HAS an ambience. A "natural system" does not have it.
RR probably used the term to explain how futile
it is to separate a cut (simple?) model from its "ambience".
"But some of the behaviors of the phytoplankton will be generated
purely from within. Are they triggered? Yes. But from within the organization
itself. ..."
So the phytoplankton still 'decides' by itself? why just at "that" moment?
No natural iniciation - maybe through several (unrecognized?) steps, maybe as
inside reaction to some imput? - to trigger it? God personally instructed the
phytoplankton?
"contained within the organization of the system" is a
reductionist model view. Unless we speak about a singularity (which does not
exist). The 'system' is in 2-way interaction with its 'ambience' and is part of
it. Even the phytoplankton. No special magic done for living(?) cells.
Please read yhour own last par: why do I have to
argue for the same thing?
and to the last sentence:
"...metabolism is something that is
entailed from within the organism. It also is clear that the organism doesn't
"decide" to metabolize"
Do you mean: 'eat your heart out? otherwise you
need something from 'the outside' to metabolize. At least things gotten
in by an earlier step - from the 'ambience'.
Unless you mean 'metabolism' the functional
concept. That really came from the 'outside' (by the originating cells and
processes) when the cell-structure was built and its functions established.
John M
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 6:57
AM
Subject: Re: Could you give me your
analysis of this?
Oops, I meant to comment on this bit as
well:
> John M. wrote: Conform with your additional
defining: this is a necessary, but by far not
> sufficent description.
("one of") - IMO complex systems (any, as everything
> else) have
open connections with 'the world outside our model', do we
> recognize
them, or not. We cannot list all sufficient causes, unless we
> restrict
the topical view to be explained. I still doubt the 'working'
> closed
loops without (un)closed triggering, maybe indirectly. "A system does
>
not DECIDE by itself."
That depends on the system, I suppose!
(Sorry, I couldn't resist.) But, getting serious now, I agree that a
single celled phytoplankton does not "decide". Instead, it "behaves"-- meaning
it acts and reacts. Some of its behaviors are a direct result of
interaction between the system and its "ambience" (as my father referred to
the world outside any given system). But some of the behaviors of the
phytoplankton will be generated purely from within. Are they triggered? Yes.
But from within the organization itself. What the statement about "closed to
efficient cause" means is that the entailment structure having to do with
aspects of "efficient cause" is a closed loop, contained within the
organization of the system.
Remember that there are four categories of causality that my
father talked about, based on Aristotle's work. Each category addresses
different aspects entirely-- (different categories of answers to "why?"
questions). Therefore, each mode of analysis is going to generate different
kinds of information (categories of "because..." answers). Therefore, the
statement "closed to efficient cause" only refers to the one category,
without specifying anything about the others.
It's also worth pointing out that aspects of the ambience (be
they weather-related or the predation of other organisms, etc) can and do
interfere with the behaviors and organization of organisms-- it's not that
that this organization is impervious to interference or interaction. Clearly,
the quality of metabolism, for example, is going to be impacted in a famine of
that particular organism's food source/s. So even though the quality of
metabilism is "closed to efficient cause", the ambience exerts influences that
have consequences. This doesn't change the fact that metabolism is something
that is entailed from within the organism. It also is clear that the organism
doesn't "decide" to metabolize.
Judith
|