What makes life vital (Introduction)

by David Turell , Saturday, February 28, 2015, 15:33 (3555 days ago)

An essay on the total interconnectedness of living tissues and organisms by Stephen L. Talbott:-http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-unbearable-wholeness-of-beings-" This is the second in a set of essays by Mr. Talbott explaining the significance of a revolution in genetics and molecular biology. The first installment, “Getting Over the Code Delusion,” which appeared in our Summer 2010 issue, sought to puncture some of the familiar dogmas about DNA as rigidly encoded destiny. Subsequent installments are: “What Do Organisms Mean?” (Winter 2011) and “Evolution and the Illusion of Randomness” (Fall 2011)."-"The aspects of the organism triggering the whole dispute have commonly been associated with one or more of the following themes:-• The peculiar unity of whole and part: The form, existence, and activities of the parts depend upon, and arise from — are in some sense caused by — the whole, which is therefore expressed in one way or another through every part. This is much like the relation between individual words and their context — which is not surprising, since language is itself an expression of organic life.-• Means-end (“purposive” or “final”) relations: Biological activities are carried out as if “with a view toward” or “for the sake of” some end. The organism “aims” to develop and sustain itself as a being with its own particular character. (I use quotation marks here because it is agreed on all sides that the directed aspect of biological performance should be distinguished from conscious human purpose, even if such purpose is viewed as a coming to intentional self-awareness of whatever expresses itself unreflectively in the wisdom of the body.)-• The mutual (reciprocal) play of cause and effect: Effects are not merely effects, but can simultaneously react back upon their causes. Or, as Kant puts it, the parts “should so combine in the unity of a whole that they are reciprocally cause and effect of each other's form.”[29]-" To give an archetypal example, as the embryo polarizes into anterior and posterior, each pole is not only “opposite” to the other, but necessarily implied in the other. Each pole is properly formed only by virtue of the other's being formed. Neither is a unilateral cause of the other.-"All three of these features are at least suggested by the rather simpler statement that we find in every organism a meaningful coordination of its activities, whereby it becomes a functioning and self-sustaining unity engaged in a flexible response to the infinitely varying stimuli of its environment. By virtue of this coordination, every local or partial activity expresses its share in the distinctive character of the whole. The ability of the organism to pursue its own ends amid an ever-shifting context means that causal relations become fluid and diffuse, losing all fixity. They are continually subordinated to, or lifted into service of, the agency of the organism as a whole."-In summary his point is that we are not machines in any true sense of the word. After reading his essay, tell me if you still think this can develop from inorganic material by chance. I've read and quoted from all four essays. Try them out.