----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 5:34
AM
Subject: Re: sixth sense (and seventh,
eighth, ninth...)
Jerry Zhu wrote: "I predict five thousand years or more later no men has
hair."
What about women?
(Sorry, I couldn't resist!!!)
Seriously; I have to say that I think there's more to living
interaction with self and environment for any organism than just the inner and
outer, as you described in your post. Anticipatory Systems Theory posits that
living systems possess and utilize encoded information (models) of themselves
and their environment that includes aspects of time such that the models
generate predictive conditions for what they model, based on
present conditions, and this collective capability acts as an
anticipatory control system within the organism as a whole. If that's so, then
what's "inner" and what's "outer" depends entirely on context.
For example, if something were to shift configuration, the way
proteins fold or a developing embryo changes its configuration from a hollow
ball of cells to the stage that begins main differentiation... what's inner
and what's outer will not be a constant. It will also depend on where
you're looking at it from. Each has aspects of the other because it's another
one of those "they entail each other" scenarios. In other words, there is no
"inner" unless there's "outer".
However, I agree that humanity has become far more dependent on
technological systems of systems of systems which we originally created to
augment our natural capabilities, but which are now eroding those natural
abilities. (There's a "side-effect" for you!) If the trend were to
continue at the same rate, we may end up replacing our natural abilities with
mechanical substitutes. What a scary thought! Luckily, very little in this
world goes as planned or expected. So, while that's a pain in
the ___ and we usually complain about it... it may end
up saving us.
Judith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 4:11
PM
Subject: Re: [ROSEN] sixth sense (and
seventh, eighth, ninth...)
The world animals bring forth has much richer
interactions
with their context. I characterize the
world of interaction having
inner surface and outer
surface. The inner one is physical one
(direct bodily
entanglment with context) such as taking in
food,
keeping warm, avoiding danger, having fun etc. The
outer surface
is abstract or intellectual one.
Human's can reach to the Moon which
monkeys' can only
reach to trees. The larger the world, the
more
mechnized the inner surface, the less struggle the
body has to
fight with its environment. Human's inner
surface is ever simpler and
mechanized. No need for
fur to keep warm, eat cooked food easy for
our
stomach, staying indoor, travel with vhiecles. Animals
have to use
their own body to fight with the
environment for all these. It is
no supprise that
they can escape the tsunami for their
bodily
complexity that human has degenerated. I predict
five
thousand years or more later no men has
hair.
Jerry