Re: What is closure?

[Judith Rosen <***>]

One aspect to "closed to efficient cause" that remains a bit confused is the
difference between being causally closed and being materially closed.
Organisms are materially open systems-- wide open. Metabolism, which is a
process that generally illustrates one aspect of efficient cause, is
entailed from within, but clearly isn't closed in the material sense. Matter
is constantly flowing right through an organism. So the concept of closed
loops of entailment is a very different thing from the concept of a
materially "closed system".

Judith


> John K. wrote:
> it not as "sole" but as having "closures" or being closed in certain
> specific ways. Elements of closure which then define the organism. To be
> completely closed to efficient cause would mean that all effective
> processes are interna. But since organisms contain normal physical
> matter, the definition separates that part that is not closed - i.e.,
> the physical matter and any other external ontologies -- from that which
> is -- i.e., the organism. So one can say they are completely closed to
> efficient cause because only that part that is closed to efficient cause
> is in the definition of organism - a definitional tautology in a way,
> but of course not possible unless there can be "closures" in natural
> systems. Another way to look at the idea of efficient closure, is
> inclusion of ontologies within a system. Organisms are systems that
> include their own systemic origin, or that originate their own
> organization --- all meaning pretty much the same thing.